•Er: . 


Colleqe 

^ricujture 

Arii 


University  of  Illinois 

H  Library  at 

Urbana-Champaign 
ACES 


UNIVtRSlTY  OF 

KRICUUUtt 

..  •- . 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


BULLETIN  No.   120 


MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX 
OTHER  CITIES 


BY  JOHN  M.  TRUEMAN 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  NOVEMBER,  1907 


SUMMARY  OF  BULLETIN  No.    120 

Eleven  hundred  samples  of  milk  collected  in  Chicago  and  26  other 
Illinois  cities  and  tested  by  the  writer.  Page  41 

Five  methods  of  marketing  milk.  Page  41 

Chicago  milk  conditions.  Page  43 

Of  413  tests  of  Chicago  milk,  134  or  32  percent  were  below  the  legal 
standard  of  butter  fat.  Page  45 

Of  232  samples  of  Chicago  milk  collected,  158  samples  or  68  -percent 
contained  sediment  (see  tables  2  and  3.)  One  hundred  fort}r-eight  of  these 
samples  were  given  the  Wisconsin  curd  test,  and  41  percent  showed  a  good 
curd;  only  39  percent  had  tio  unpleasant  odor,  and  only  29  percent  were  good  in 
both  texture  and  odor.  Page  46 

Of  84  samples  of  milk  collected  in  Chicago  the  next  year,  29  samples 
or  35  percent  were  low  in  butter  fat.  Over  67  percent  of  those  tested  for  total 
solids  were  below  the  legal  12  percent  standard.  Sixty-seven  were  examined 
for  sediment  and  86  percent  contained  a  visible  amount.  Page  49 

Of  150  samples  of  milk  collected  in  one  district  in  Chicago  where  the 
poorer  working  people  live,  75  samples  or  50  percent  were  below  the  legal 
standard  for  butter  fat.  Page  50 

Evidences  of  skimming  and  watering  milk.  Page  51 

Of  95  samples  of  milk  collected  in  one  of  the  richer  districts  of  Chicago, 
only  nine  percent  were  below  the  legal  standard  for  "butter  fat.  Page  52 

Why  the  Chicago  health  department  report  differs  from  the  findings  of 
the  writer.  Page  53 

Conditions  worse  in  26  smaller  cities.  Page  53 

Of  325  samples  of  milk  collected  in  26  Illinois  cities  of  over  10,000  pop- 
ulation, over  19  percent  were  found  below  the  legal  standard  of  butter  fat.  Two 
hundred  nine  of  these  samples  were  tested  for  total  solids  and  63  percent  found 
below  the  standard.  Of  the  212  of  these  samples  examined  for  sediment.  88 
percent  contained  visible  sediment,  and  24  samples  or  seven  percent  contained 
formaldehyde.  Page  57 

Dairy  conditions  without  an  excuse.  Page  58 

Of  70  samples  of  milk  collected  in  hotels  and  restaurants  in  28  Illinois 
towns,  44  or  over  62  percent  were  below  grade  in  butter  fat.  Page  59 

Requirements  for  clean  milk.  The  cows  and  buildings,  milkers  and 
methods,  utensils  and  their  cleansing,  cooling  the  milk,  transportation, 
bottling.  Page  60 

Duties  of  consumers.     Why  the  milk  sours  quickly.  Page  64 

The  inspector  who  inspects;  his  duties.  Page  65 

The  dairy  score  card  and  directions.  Page  66 

Score  card  for  inspection  of  dairies  and  city  milk  plants.  Page  67 


MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX 
OTHER  CITIES 

BY  JOHN  M.  TRUEMAN,  FIRST  ASSISTANT,  DAIRY  HUSBANDRY 

This  bulletin  reports  a  study  of  the  milk  supply  of  Chicago  and 
twenty-six  other  cities  of  10,000  or  more  population  in  Illinois. 
Practically  all  of  the  1,100  samples  of  milk  here  reported  were  col- 
lected and  analyzed  by  the  writer,  who  spent  his  entire  time  for 
seven  months  (May  to  November,  1905)  investigating  the  condi- 
tions under  which  milk  is  sold  in  Chicago.  He  covered  the  same 
territory  again  in  1906,  and  personally  inspected  the  conditions 
affecting  the  milk  supply  in  the  other  cities  referred  to. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  best  dealers  in  Chicago  are  furnishing 
a  finer  grade  of  milk  at  a  lower  price  than  can  be  found  in  almost 
any  other  large  city  in  Illinois.  It  has  been  demonstrated  that  it  is 
possible  to  bottle  milk  in  the  country  and  put  it  on  the  Chicago 
market  in  fine  condition  for  seven  cents  per  quart.*  Some  whole 
districts  in  that  city  get  universally  good  milk,  while  in  others,  sup- 
plied chiefly  by  the  small  milk  depot,  the  bulk  of  the  product  is  poor. 
In  one  district  occupied  by  working  people  just  one-half  of  the  156 
samples  collected  were  below  grade  in  butter  fat.  Most  of  this  milk 
is  up  to  grade  in  butter  fat  when  it  comes  to  the  city,  and  until  after 
the  small  dealer  has  skimmed  a  quart  or  two  of  cream  from  it. 

Many  filthy  and  unsanitary  dairies  and  city  milk  plants  were 
found,  but  the  greatest  danger  to  the  health  of  milk  consumers  was 
observed  in  the  bottling  methods  employed  by  the  Chicago  dealer 
who  runs  a  half  dozen  milk  wagons.  Incidents  of  this  inspection 
are  told  in  the  following  pages,  together  with  the  conditions  of 
dairy,  bottling  plant,  milk  depot,  and  wagon  necessary  to  produce 
and  deliver  to  the  consumer  clean,  wholesome  milk.  A  definite  and 
practical  method  of  inspection  by  means  of  the  score  card  is  also 
added. 

FIVE  METHODS  OF  MARKETING  MILK 

Five  distinct  methods  are  used  in  this  country  for  supplying  cit- 
ies with  milk. 

i.  In  the  smaller  cities,  a  large  part  of  the  milk  is  delivered 
to  the  consumer  by  the  dairyman  who  produces  it.  In  many  cases 

*True  at  least  at  the  time  these  data  were  taken. 

41 


42  BULLETIN  No.  120.  [November, 

the  milk  is  bottled  at  the  farm.  This  direct  method  would  be  the 
best  if  the  dairyman  used  sanitary  methods  in  all  his  work.  But 
the  writer  found  a  larger  percent  of  sediment  (filth)  in  milk  so 
handled  than  in  milk  marketed  by  any  other  method.  In  many  in- 
stances the  bottles  used  were  not  sterilized  at  all.  The  people  who 
keep  one  or  two  cows  in  the  city  and  sell  milk  to  their  neighbors 
often  use  worse  methods  than  the  regular  dairyman. 

2.  The  milk  is  shipped  from  the  farm  in  cans  to  the  city  and 
bought  by  either  retail  or  wholesale  dealers.     The  very  small  re- 
tailers get  their  milk  from  the  large  dealers.    Most  of  this  milk  is 
sold  directly  from  the  can  without  bottling.    This  method  gives  the 
dealer  very  little  opportunity  to  know  anything  of  the  conditions 
under  which  the  milk  is  produced. 

3.  The  milk  is  taken  by  the  farmers  to  nearby  creameries  or  milk 
stations  where  it  is  more  or  less  carefully  inspected  and  shipped  to 
the  city  in  cans  holding  from  two  to  ten  gallons.     In  the  city  the 
milk  is  bottled,  and  in  some  cases  it  is  also  pasteurized,  either  be- 
fore or  after  reaching  the  city. 

4.  The  milk  is  shipped  from  the  farm  in  cans  to  large  dealers 
who  have  bottling  plants  in  the  city.     Milk  that  comes  thus  from 
inspected  farms,  that  is  quickly  cooled  after  reaching  the  city,  and 
is  put  in  sterilized  bottles  by  sanitary  methods,  is  a  fair  article.   But 
here  again,  the  dealer  is  too  far  from  the  dairyman  to  keep  in  touch 
with  his  methods.    Too  often  he  finds  that  the  milk  will  not  keep 
sweet  and  so  resorts  to  pasteurization  as  quickly  as  possible.    And 
too  much  of  this  milk  comes  from  dairies  that  are  not  clean  and  is 
handled  in  the  city  by  bad  methods.    Such  milk  put  into  unsterilized 
bottles  is  probably  the  most  dangerous  of  any  sold  in  Chicago.   The 
worst  milk  as  well  as  the  best  milk  is  delivered  in  bottles. 

5.  The  milk  is  delivered  by  the  farmer  to  a  bottling  plant  ^n  the 
country,  where  it  is  quickly  cooled,  bottled,  packed  in  ice  and  shipped 
to  the  city.    By  this  method  the  milk  is  put  under  the  control  of  the 
dealer  in  the  shortest  time  possible  after  milking,  and  does  not  travel 
or  wait  several  hours  before  proper  cooling.    The  best  milk  in  Chi- 
cago is  furnished  in  this  way.     Furthermore,  the  men  in  charge  of 
the  bottling  plant  are  in  close  touch  with  the  producer  and  can  aid 
him  in  establishing  the  best  methods  of  caring  for  his  milk.     This 
is  the  ideal  way  of  handling  the  product  for  city  consumption. 

.  All  five  methods  are  extensively  used  in  Chicago,  but  St.  Louis 
gets  a  large  part  of  its  milk  by  the  third  method. 


MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES.  43 

CHICAGO    CONDITIONS 

UNSANITARY  MILK  DEPOTS 

It  was  an  exception  to  find  a  milk  depot*  that  was  clean  and 
sanitary.  A  great  many  of  these  markets  are  located  in  dark,  dirty, 
and  ill-ventilated  basements  where  the  sunlight  never  enters.  They 
are  never  scrubbed  out  and  many  of  them  could  not  be  scrubbed 
clean  because  the  floors  are  of  rotten  wood  or  only  of  earth;  and 
so  they  are  kept  foul  with  sour  and  decaying  milk.  These  depots 
would  be  bad  enough  if  they  received  only  bottled  milk  and  sold  it 
without  opening  the  bottle;  but  commonly  the  milk  is  stored  in 
large  cans  dipped  into  open  vessels  when  sold  and  often  carried 
through  dusty  streets  for  several  blocks.  Such  conditions  are  de- 
plorable. Occasionally,  but  rarely,  one  of  these  small  depots  is 
found  scrupulously  clean. 


In  the  better  portions  of  the  city  much  of  the  milk  is  delivered 
from  wagons,  and  a  large  part  of  it  by  big  dealers.  This  milk  is 
uniformly  up  to  grade  in  butter  fat  but  the  amount  of  sediment  in 
the  bottom  of  the  bottle  is  occasionally  quite  large.  If  all  parts  of 
the  city  were  furnished  with  as  good  milk  as  the  wealthy  people 
receive,  very  little  cause  for  criticism  would  exist.  It  is  not  pri- 
marily a  question  of  price,  as  the  greater  part  of  the  best  milk  sold 
in  the  city  retails  from  seven  to  eight  cents,  while  the  poor  milk 
sold  to  the  working  people  from  open  cans  brings  six  cents.  It  is 
cause  for  congratulation  that  an  increasing  proportion  of  the  work- 
ing people  are  being  supplied  with  clean  milk  in  sterilized  bottles. 
The  small  depot,  although  it  keeps  the  milk  cold  for  the  poor  people 
who  have  no  ice  box  or  cellar  and  enables  them  to  buy  in  small  quan- 
tities, is  a  doubtful  blessing.  The  best  of  the  big  dealers  furnish  a 
much  better  quality  of  milk  at  a  moderate  price,  and  it  may  be  kept 
sweet  in  a  cool  cellar  for  the  day's  consumption. 

The  following  tables  exhibit  the  conditions  of  some  hundreds  of 
samples  of  milk  taken  by  the  writer  under  a  variety  of  conditions  in 
the  city  of  Chicago  in  the  summers  of  1905  and  1906: 


*A  milk  depot  is  a  place  where  milk  is  retailed. 


44 


BULLETIN  No.  120. 


[November, 


TABLE  1.    THE  PERCENTAGE  OF  BUTTER  FAT  IN  SAMPLES  OF  MILK  COL- 
LECTED IN  CHICAGO  DURING  THE  SUMMER  OF  1905 


V  C 

a* 

=  E 

rt  3 

00  C 

*J 

c 

•rS 
its 

fa  a 

Sample 
number. 

I 

c 

«jj 

«  £ 
fa  a 

Sample 
number. 

Fat, 
percent. 

Sample 
number. 

' 

^  u 

«  s 

fa  o. 

o>  ^ 
a,S 
£E 
CC  n 

Fat, 
percent. 

1 

3.0 

51 

3.6 

101 

3.8 

151 

2.0 

201 



3.0 

52 

3.0 

102 

3.4 

152 

T.  C 

202 

3 

3.  '3 

53 

3.1 

103 

4!o 

153 

o  .  o 

2.8 

203 

3.6 

4 

3.2 

54 

4.2 

104 

3.9 

154 

1.6 

204 

3.2 

5 

2.2 

55 

3.6 

105 

3.4 

155 

2.2 

205 

3.7 

6 

3.9 

56 

3.4 

106 

3.0 

156 

3.3 

206 

3.6 

7 

3.0 

57 

3.6 

107 

3.5 

157 

2.4 

207 

4.0 

8 

0.9 

58 

3.4 

108 

3.6 

158 

2.7 

208 

3.6 

,  9 

3.2 

59 

3.5 

109 

3.4 

159 

3.9 

209 



10 

2.0 

60 

3.6 

110 

2.8 

160 

3.0 

210 

2.6 

-i  -i 

61 

3  4 

111 

•?  Q 

1M 

•7  fi 

211 

12 

o  .  o 

3.0 

62 

O  •  ~ 

3.4 

112 

—  1  •  -S 

2.8 

1  <  )  L 

162 

£  .  O 

3.5 

212 

2.9 

13 

2.8 

63 

3.5 

113 

2.9 

163 

1.8 

213 

3.9 

H 

3.0 

64 

*36.5 

114 

3.5 

164 

2.8 

214 

*24.7 

15 

3.8 

65 

3.8 

115 

2.2 

165 

2.4 

215 

3.3 

16 

2.6 

66 

3.5 

116 

3.0 

166 

2.3 

216 

3.5 

17 

3.2 

67 

3.4 

117 

2.2 

167 

3.1 

217 

3.6 

18 

3.1 

68 

3.0 

118 

3.4 

168 

2  2 

218 

3.5 

19 

2  4 

69 

3.8 

119 

4.0 

169 

1.7 

219 

3.7 

20 

2.3 

70 

3.9 

120 

3.0 

170 

2.3 

220 

4.3 

21 

2.7 

71 

2.6 

121 

3.8 

171 

2.4 

221 

4.3 

22 

1.3 

72 

2.6 

122 

3.2 

172 

1.6 

222 

3  2 

23 

3.0 

73 

2.5 

123 

2.8 

173 

3.4 

223 

2.4 

24 

3.2 

74 

2.4 

124 

3.8 

174 

3.8 

224 

1.8 

25 

2.0 

75 

3.6 

125 

2.3 

175 

3.4 

225 

2.6 

26 

3.0 

76 

3.5 

126 

2.6 

176 

3.5 

226 

3.4 

27 

4.0 

77 

4.0 

127 

2.4 

177 

3.0 

227 

3.2 

28 

2.9 

78 

3.4 

128 

3.7 

178 

3.8 

228 

*25.0 

29 

3.5 

79 

3.0 

129 

2.1 

179 

3.6 

229 

*35.0 

30 

4.0 

80 

2.0 

130 

3.4 

180 

3  6 

230 

1.1 

31 

3.2 

81 

2.8 

131 

3.0 

181 

4.2 

231 

3.0 

32 

3.2 

82 

3.2 

132 

3.3 

182 

3.7 

232 

4.0 

33 

3.2 

83 

1.5 

133 

3.0 

183 

40 

233 

3.2 

34 

3.2 

84 

2.7 

134 

3.0 

184 

4.4 

234 

2.3 

35 

2.3 

85 

2.4 

135 

3.6 

185 

4.8 

235 

2.1 

36 

3.0 

86 

2.2 

136 

2.4 

186 

4.0 

236 

2.7 

37 

2.4 

87 

3.2 

137 

4.0 

187 

2.6 

237 

2.6 

38 

3.9 

88 

2.7 

138 

2.2 

188 

3.3 

238 

2.9 

39 

1.9 

89 

3.0 

139 

3.6 

189 

3.6 

239 

2.9 

40 

3.5 

90 

3.7 

140 

3.0 

190 

3  4 

240 

2.8 

41 

2.6 

91 

2.0 

141 

3.0 

191 

3.6 

241 

3.4 

42 

3.6 

92 

2.7 

142 

1.8 

192 

3.6 

242 

3.3 

43 

2.6 

93 

3.0 

143 

3.6 

193 

3.6 

243 

2.3 

44 

3.1 

94 

*36.0 

144 

6.7 

194 

3.1 

244 

3.2 

45 

3.4 

95 

3.5 

145 

3.2 

195 

3.7 

245 

2.8 

AA 

^  C 

Q/: 

•1  A 

14fi 

^  7 

-IQ/C 

*14  7<; 

f>>±f\ 

T-O 

47 

o  .  O 

3.5 

-7U 

97 

o  .  *r 

3.4 

J-T-O 

147 

o  •  & 

1.6 

JL:?O 

197 

o-r  .  /  O 

4.1 

^H-O 

247 

3.1 

48 

3.5 

98 

3.6 

148 

3.0 

198 

3.7 

248 

3.0 

49 

3.6 

99 

3.5 

149 

2.4 

199 

3.3 

249 

*26.0 

50 

3.2 

100 

3.8 

150 

4.0 

200 

3.7 

250 

3.0 

*Cream. 


1907.]          MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES. 

TABLE  1  CONTINUED 


45 


Is 

a 
il 

a  h 
SJ 

BS 

a 
•*•§ 

JHSS 

a.0 

ss 

a 

si 

a;  u 

eLS 
ES 

a 
*r  u 

i"l 

8 

a  3 

rt  5 

-  = 

rt  <y 

rt  g 

«  £ 

«  3 

rt  gj 

rt  Q) 

03  B 

fa  a 

03  a 

fa  0. 

03  B 

fa  a 

O3  8 

fa  a 

W  B 

fa  a 

251 

3.7 

288 

2.9 

325 

*26.0 

362 

2.7 

399 

2.1 

7  co 

**o  S 

OQQ 

•2  ^ 

T?f\ 

'J  fr-l 

-2  a 

j.nn 

9  n 

MWW 

253 

\J  •  O 

*25.0 

^OI7 

290 

O  •  £ 

2.6 

o—  o 

327 

3.5 

OOO 

364 

O  .  O 

3.0 

^rUU 

401 

<B*  V 

22 

254 

3.5 

291 

4.1 

328 

3.0 

365 

2.8 

402 

2.6 

255 

3.6 

292 

3.2 

329 

3.2 

366 

3.8 

403 

3.2 

256 

3.6 

293 

3.0 

330 

3.7 

367 

3.8 

404 

1.7 

257 

3.6 

294 

3.0 

331 

3.8 

368 

3.6 

405 

3.4 

258 

3.6 

205 

3.5 

332 

3.0 

369 

3.6 

406 

2.7 

259 

*25.0 

296 

3.1 

333 

2.6 

370 

3  6 

407 

2.8 

260 

*26.0 

297 

3  7 

334 

3.2 

371 

2.0 

408 



261 

2.6 

298 

4.2 

335 

3.8 

372 

2.8 

409 

3.8 

262 

3.1 

299 

3.4 

336 

1.3 

373 

2.6 

410 

4.0 

263 

2  5 

300 

1.6 

337 

2.5 

374 

2.6 

411 

3.7 

264 

1.8 

301 

3.8 

338 

3.6 

375 

2.5 

412 

3.9 

265 

2.2 

302 

3.6 

339 

4.5 

376 

2.0 

413 

4.0 

266 

2.5 

303 

3.6- 

340 

3.2 

377 

2.4 

414 

4.0 

267 

2.6 

304 

3.7 

341 



378 

2.7 

415 

4.4 

268 

1.8 

305 

3.1 

342 

1.6 

379 

2.3 

416 

2.8 

269 

3.0 

306 

3.4 

343 

3.2 

380 

3.0 

417 

3.0 

270 

3.0 

307 

3.8 

344 

3.0 

381 

3.0 

418 

3.6 

271 

3.0 

308 

3.3 

345 

2.4 

382 

3.5 

419 

3.3 

272 

3.0 

309 

3.6 

346 

2.1 

383 

3.4 

420 

3.8 

273 

2.2 

310 

3.4 

347 

3.8 

384 

3.0 

421 

6.3 

274 

4.4 

311 

3.6 

348 

3.0 

385 

2.9 

422 

3.8 

275 

3.3 

312 

3.8 

349 

3.2 

386 

2  7 

423 

3.3 

276 

2.8 

313 

2.4 

350 

3.6 

387 

1.5 

424 

4.2 

277 

2.4 

314 

4  4 

351 

3.0 

388 

2.0 

425 

3.5 

278 

3.2 

315 

3.4 

352 

2.6 

389 

3.0 

426 

3.3 

279 

3.5 

316 

3.0 

353 

2.6 

39.» 

3.7 

427 

3.0 

280 

3  1 

317 

2.6 

354 

3.4 

391 

2.8 

428 

2.8 

281 

2.5 

318 

3.6 

355 

3.4 

392 

2.7 

429 

3.2 

282 

1.8 

319 

3.5 

356 

3.0 

393 

3.2 

430 

4.0 

283 

2.8 

320 

2.8 

357 

3.2 

394 

3.0 

431 

3  2 

284 

3.2 

321 

6.3 

358 

3.6 

395 

2.6 

432 



285 

2.4 

232 

3.7 

359 

2.8 

396 

2.6 

433 

4.1 

286 

4.1 

323 

*15.3 

360 

4.5 

397 

2.8 

434 

3.6 

287 

2.6 

324 

3.4 

361 

32 

398 

3.0 

435 

3.6 

*Cream.     **Buttermilk. 

This  table  contains  413  tests  of  milk  and  eleven  tests  of  cream. 
One  hundred  thirty-four,  or  32  percent  of  these  samples  are  below 
the  legal  standard  of  3  percent  butter  fat. 

A  study  of  the  table  will  show  that  20  of  these  samples  are 
below  2  percent  in  butter  fat  and  average  only  1.6  percent,  and  that 
68  samples  or  one-eighth  of  all  are  no  higher  than  2.5  percent,  aver- 
aging 2  percent.  The  sale  of  such  low  grade  milk  is  all  the  more 
significant  when  it  is  noted  that  141  of  these  samples,  one-third  of 
all,  tested  as  high  as  3.5  and  averaged  3.8  percent.  These  141 
samples  are  evidently  whole  milk  just  as  produced  by  the  cows. 


46 


BULLETIN  No.  120. 


[November, 


TABLE  2.    THE  PERCENTAGE  OK  FAT  AND  AMOUNT  OF  SEDIMENT  IN  SAM- 
PLES OF  MILK  COLLECTED  IN  CHICAGO  DURING  THE  SUMMER  OF  1905 


Sample 
number. 

a 
<u 
*r  u 
it  £ 

fc  a 

5    I 

3s-i  a 
0  O  « 

*  'i 

•<    £ 

«  u 

a3 

as 

a  = 
en  s 

a 
<u 

•>->  ° 

£& 

B        g 

3<w  3 

o  o  5 
1    1 

Sample 
number. 

B 

& 

*T  o 
it  « 
fc  P. 

s     S 
§o§ 

I   =8 

<<       <n 

426 
427 

3.3 
3.0 

Medium 

459 

460 

2.0 
3.4 

Small 
ii 

492 
493 

3.3 
3.7 

Small 

428 
429 
430 
431 
432 

2.8 
3.2 
4.0 

3.2 

Medium 

None 
Extreme 
Small 

461 
462 
463 
464 
465 

2.0 
3.0 
3.5 
2.9 
4.9 

None 
Medium 

Small 
Larere 

494 
495 
496 
497 

498 

3.1 
3.6 
3.2 
2.4 
4.6 

Medium 

None 

Small 

433 
•434 

4.1 
3.6 

None 
ii 

466 
467 

3.6 

4.0 

Small 

499 
500 

3.3 

2.8 

« 

435 
436 
437 
438 
439 
440 
441 
442 
443 

3.6 
2.9 

3.2 
2.5 
2.4 
7.5 
3.0 
8.4 
0.7 

ii 

Large 
Medium 

Large 
i< 

ii 

None 
Medium 

468 
469 
470 
471 
472 
473 
474 
475 
476 

2.9 
3.6 
3.6 
3.6 
3.0 
4.2 
3.6 
3.8 
3.4 

« 
None 

Small 

Medium 
None 

ii 

501 
502 
503 
504 
505 
506 
507 
508 
509 

1.8 
6.3 
5.0 
3.5 
3.5 
5.6 
3.0 
5.4 
3.0 

Large 
Medium 

Large 
Trace 
Small 
None 

Large 

444 
445 

2.8 
3.4 

Medium 
None 

477 
478 

3.6 

3.6 

ii 

510 
511 

3.4 
3.2 

None 
Large 

446 

3.6 

« 

479 

4.0 

512 

6.4 

Medium 

447 
448 

,3.6 

ii 

Large 

480 
481 

4.0 

3.0 

None 
Large 

513 
514 

4.8 
36 

Large 

Small 

449 

3.4 

None 

482 

2.8 

515 

2.8 

Medium 

450 
451 

3.0 
3.8 

Larere 

483 
484 

3.8 
*15.0 

Medium 

516 
517 

2.0 

2.2 

None 
Small 

452 

3.3 

485 

3  3 

Small 

518 

3.2 

None 

453 
454 

455 

3.8 
4.2 
2.9 

None 
Small 
Medium 

486 

487 
488 

2.8 
3.3 
3.2 

ii 
ii 

519 

520 
521 

3.8 
3.0 

3.2 

Large 
Small 
Medium 

456 

4.0 

489 

4.8 

Larere 

522 

3.8 

None 

457 
458 

3.7 
3.1 

Medium  J; 
ii 

490 
491 

4.0 

Medium^ 
ii 

523 
524 

3.2 
3.4 

ii 

« 

*Cream. 

This  table  contains  95  tests  of  milk,  of  which  20  percent  are 
low  in  butter  fat.  Of  the  89  samples  examined  for  sediment,  61  or 
over  68  percent  contained  sediment,  23  percent  showing  a  small 
amount,  24  percent  a  medium  amount,  and  16  percent  a  large 
amount. 

Sediment  or  filth  in  milk  means  a  lack  of  clean  methods  in  milk- 
ing and  handling  the  milk.  Tables  2  and  3  show  that  two-thirds  of 
232  samples  of  milk  sold  in  Chicago  contained  dirt  of  some  sort. 
They  also  show  that  clean  milk  is  produced  by  quite  a  number  of 
the  best  dairymen  and  dealers. 

A  "trace"  means  an  amount  noticeable  only  by  close  examination;  "small,"  an  amount 
easily  noticeable  but  covering-  only  a  small  portion  of  the  bottom  of  the  bottle;  "medium,"  an 
amount  sufficient  to  form  a  complete  ring',  covering-  at  least  one-half  of  the  bottom  of  the  bot- 
tle. >.This  last  seems  to  be  the  amount  that  people  will  permit  without  serious  protest.  It  is 
the  ordinary  quantity  of  barnyard  filth  that  consumers  get  accustomed  to  seeing  in  the  bottom 
of  the  bottle,  and  they  apparently  think  it  unavoidable.  "Larg'e"  means  an  amount  sufficient 
to  cover  the  whole  bottom  of  the  bottle  with  a 'layer  of  dirt;  "extreme,"  is  too  much  to  talk 
about;  it  is  left  to  the  Imagination  of  the  reader. 


1907.] 


MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES. 


47 


TABLE  3.  THE  PERCENTAGE  OF  BUTTER  FAT,  AMOUNT  OF  SEDIMENT,  AND 
CONDITION  OF  CURD  BY  WISCONSIN  CURD  TEST  IN  MILK  SAMPLES  COLLECTED 
IN  CHICAGO  DURING  THE  SUMMER  OF  1905. 


3S 

O»0 

=  S 
rt  3 

03  - 

0) 

^ro 

!i 

-  o, 

Amount 
of 
sediment. 

Wis.  curd  test 
Condition  of  curd. 

Sample 
number. 

tfi 

•-    rti 

fe  a 

Amount 
of 
sediment. 

Wis.  curd  test 
Condition  of  curd. 

Texture. 

Odor. 

Texture. 

Odor. 

525 

3.2 

Medium 

Fair 

Fair 

575 

3.4 

Large 

Good 

Vile 

526 

3.2 

None 

Good 

Good 

576 

3.3 

Small 

" 

Good 

527 

3.6 

Fair 

Fair 

577 

3.0 

Extreme 

11 

" 

528 

4.0 

" 

" 

578 

4.2 

Small 

« 

« 

529 

3.8 

Soft 

Offens. 

579 

3.2 

Medium 

Fair 

Fair 

530 

3.2 

Good 

Fair 

580 

3.0 

Small 

Good 

Good 

531 

2.4 

ii 

Good 

581 

4.3 

« 

ii 

532 

3.4 

Small 

ii 

ii 

582 

4.0 

Medium 

ii 

Fair 

533 

2.8 

Large 

Gassy 

Bad 

583 

3.6 

None 

Gassy 

n 

534 

2.8 

Medium 

Good 

Fair 

584 

4.4 

" 

Bad 

535 

3.2 

Extreme 

Fair 

Offens. 

585 

3.6 

Large 

Fair 

Good 

536 

3.8 

None 

Good 

Good 

586 

3.0 

ii 

Gassy 

Fair 

537 

3.8 

Small 

Gassy 

Bad 

587 

3.8 

None 

Good 

Good 

538 

3.5 

u 

ii 

588 

3.8 

ii 

ii 

14 

539 

2.9 

Large 

11 

Fair 

589 

3.4 

Large 

Gassy 

Bad 

540 

Fair 

ii 

590 

3.2 

« 

K 

Good 

541 

3.2 

Medium 

Good 

<( 

591 

3.2 

None 

Good 

542 

3.8 

None 

ii 

ii 

592 

3.0 

Small 

Gassy 

Fair 

543 

4.0 

Large 

ii 

« 

593 

4.0 

None 

" 

14 

544 

4.0 

None 

Fair 

Good 

594 

4.1 

Medium 

Good 

Bad 

545 

4.1 

Large 

Soft 

Bad 

595 

3.9 

Small 

" 

Good 

546 

4.0 

Small 

Fair 

ii 

596 

3.4 

Large 

ii 

" 

547 

3.9 

None 

Good 

Good 

597 

3.9 

Small 

Gassy 

Fair 

548 

3.9 

Small 

ii 

ii 

598 

4.4 

M 

Good 

Bad 

549 

4.4 

None 

«« 

Fair 

599 

4.1 

None 

" 

Good 

550 

3.8 

Medium 

Fair 

Bad 

600 

4.1 

ii 

" 

" 

551 

4.6 

« 

Good 

Good 

601 

3.5 

Small 

Gassy 

ii 

552 

3.8 

Large 

14 

Bad 

602 

3.7 

Medium 

Good 

ii 

553 

3.8 

Medium 

Fair 

14 

603 

3.6 

None 

•' 

14 

554 

4.4 

« 

Good 

Good 

604 

4.0 

Small 

14 

« 

555 

4.2 

Large 

ii 

« 

605 

4.1 

Medium 

Fair 

Bad 

556 

3.9 

« 

Fair 

Bad 

606 

3.5 

None 

ti 

" 

557 

3.9 

None 

Good 

Good 

607 

3.5 

Large 

Gassy 

14 

558 

3.6 

ii 

fi 

11 

608 

3.4 

Small 

" 

Fair 

559 

3.4 

Medium 

Fair 

Fair 

609 

3.7 

Medium 

Good 

Good 

560 

4.0 

None 

Good 

Good 

610 

3.8 

None 

•• 

" 

561 

3.4 

« 

Fair 

Fair 

611 

3.6 

Large 

14 

" 

562 

3.6 

ii 

Good 

Good 

612 

4.4 

Small 

II 

" 

563 

4.2 

ii 

Fair 

Fair 

613 

3.9 

Large 

Gassy 

Bad 

564 

1.9 

ii 

Good 

« 

614 

3.0 

Small 

Good 

Good 

565 

2.8 

Large 

Gassy 

ii 

615 

3.5 

ii 

Gassy 

Fair 

566 

3.8 

Small 

" 

Bad 

616 

3.4 

Large 

" 

" 

567 

4.0 

Medium 

11 

Fair 

617 

3.3 

Small 

" 

Good 

568 

0.8 

Small 

" 

Bad 

618 

4.8 

Large 

" 

Bad 

569 

2.8 

None 

Good 

Fair 

619 

2.8 

None 

" 

Fair 

570 

4.7 

Medium 

Gassy 

" 

620 

3.9 

Large 

Good 

Good 

571 

4.0 

Large 

Fair 

Bad 

621 

4.1 

Small 

14 

ii 

572 

5.0 

None 

" 

" 

622 

3.0 

Large 

Gassy 

Bad 

573 

3.2 

Medium 

Soft 

Fair 

/  623 

3.2 

" 

Fair 

Good 

574 

3.4 

(( 

Good 

Good 

624 

3.0 

Small 

" 

" 

1 

48 


BULLETIN  No.  120. 
TABLE  3,  CONTINUED 


[November, 


a)  fe 

US 
Sc 

r.  ^ 

en  a 

c 

rt     QJ 

fe  a 

Amount 
of 
sediment. 

Wis.  curd  test, 
conditions  of  curd. 

Sample 
number. 

c 

--! 

ti  S3 
fea 

Amount 
of 
sediment. 

Wis.  curd  test, 
conditions  of  curd. 

Texture 

Odor. 

•  Texture. 

Odor. 

625 

3.7 

Medium 

Good 

Good 

649 

4.0 

Small 

Fair 

Fair 

626 

4.2 

Large 

Gassy 

" 

650 

3.6 

ti 

Slimy 

" 

627 

3.6 

Medium 

" 

Bad 

651 

3.9 

None 

Fair 

Fair 

628 

3.6 

II 

Good 

Good 

652 

3.9 

»« 

Gassy 

Bad 

629 

2.7 

Small 

Gassy 

Fair 

653 

3.7 

" 

" 

ii 

630 

3.2 

None 

" 

Bad 

654 

3.4 

Large 

ti 

Fair 

631 

4  2 

Medium 

" 

Fair 

655 

3.6 

None 

it 

ii 

632 

3.9 

Small 

Good 

Good 

656 

3.4 

Small 

" 

1  1 

633 

Medium 

Gassy 

Fair 

657 

3.7 

it 

ii 

Bad 

634 

3.8 

None 

Bad 

658 

4.3 

it 

" 

ii 

635 

3.8 

it 

>< 

659 

3.9 

None 

Good 

Good 

636 

3.3 

None 

Fair 

Good 

660 

3.2 

Small 

ii 

637 

3.9 

" 

" 

Bad 

661 

3.9 

Large 

Gassy 

Bad 

638 

3.8 

" 

Good 

Good 

662 

2.9 

it 

ii 

Fair 

639 

3.7 

Small 

ii 

" 

663 

4.8 

ii 

" 

Bad 

640 

2.8 

Medium 

II 

Bad 

664 

5.1 

ii 

" 

Fair 

641 

3.9 

Small 

Gassy 

" 

665 

4.0 

None 

Fair 

Bad 

642 

2.9 

ti 

" 

Good 

666 

4  5 

Large 

Good 

Good 

643 

3.3 

None 

" 

Bad 

667 

3.4 

Small 

" 

Fair 

644 

3.2 

ii 

Good 

Good 

668 

4.6 

Medium 

ii 

Good 

645 

2.4 

Small 

Fair 

" 

669 

3.2 

None 

Gassy 

Bad 

646 

3.8 

Extreme 

Gassy 

Bad 

670 

4.0 

ii 

" 

ii  . 

647 

4.0 

Small 

" 

ii 

671 

3.6 

Small 

Fair 

Fair 

648 

3.9 

Large 

ii 

Good 

672 

3.6 

Bad 

This  table  contains  148  tests  of  milk.  Of  the  143  examined, 
over  68  percent,  the  same  as  in  Table  2,  contained  sediment;  26 
percent  showing  a  small  amount;  17  percent,  a  medium  amount; 
21  percent,  a  large  amount,  and  three  samples  were  extreme.  All 
of  the  samples  were  tested  by  the  Wisconsin  curd  test;*  41  percent 
gave  a  good  curd,  only  39  percent  had  no  unpleasant  odor,  and 
only  30  percent  were  good  in  both  texture  and  odor. 

Table  3  contains  a  much  smaller  percent  of  samples  low  in  fat 
than  do  Tables  i  and  2.  This  is  because  they  were  collected  in  a  dif- 
ferent part  of  the  city.  A  report  of  the  average  percent  below 
grade  all  over  the  city  means  nothing,  as  some  whole  districts  get 
uniformly  good  milk,  while  in  others  the  bulk  of  the  supply  is  poor. 

It  should  be  noted  that,  although  milk  without  sediment  gener- 
ally gave  a  good  curd,  in  many  cases  this  rule  did  not  hold  true. 
Samples  527  to  531  contained  no  sediment  and  yet,  of  the  five,  only 
one  gave  a  good  curd  with  good  odor.  No.  529  had  such  a  bad  odor 
as  to  be  offensive.  Milk  may  have  the  visible  sediment  removed  by 
various  methods  of  clarification,  but  this  does  not  remove  the  dis- 
solved filth  or  the  harmful  germs  that  careless  methods  have  intro- 
duced. Therefore  we  get  poor  curd  and  vile  odors  from  some  milk 
that  is  apparently  clean. 

*The  curd  test  is  used  by  cheesemakers  to  determine  which  patrons  of  the 
factory  deliver  bad  milk.  The  developing  of  a  soft,  gassy,  or  bad  smelling 
curd  is  evidence  of  dirt  and  gas-producing  germs  in  the  milk. 


1907.} 


MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES. 


49 


TABLE  4.  THE  PERCENTAGE  OF  BUTTER  FAT,  TOTAL  SOLIDS,  AND 
AMOUNT  OF  SEDIMENT  IN  SAMPLES  OF  MILK  COLLECTED  IN  CHICAGO  DUR- 
ING THE  SUMMER  OF  1906. 


Sample 
number. 

jj 

£$ 

-•2 

rt-a  g 

£H 

a     v 
3<<-i  B 
o  o  E 

I    * 

•^       ai 

A 

cue 
p 

a  a 
CO  a 

a 
4-8 

ti  *-• 

ra  u 

b  a 

Si! 

git 

1  i 

?  s-<  d 
0  0  » 

1  * 

•<       01 

673 
674 
675 

4.2 
3.4 

3.8 

12.14 
11.85 
12.26 

Large 
(i 

718 
719 
720 

s'.i 

3.1 

3.3 

11.12 
12.12 

Small 
Trace 

676 
677 

678 

3.6 

3.2 
3.4 

11.72 
11.59 

11.58 

« 
Extreme 

721 

722 
723 

5.0 
4.4 
12.0 

13.00 
12.68 

Small 
« 

679 

3  0 

11.35 

Trace 

724 

2.7 

Medium 

680 

3.2 

11.64 

« 

725 

Small 

681 

3.6 

10.12 

Extreme 

726 

2  8 

Medium 

682 

2  6 

11.87 

Small 

727 

3.6 

None 

683 

2.8 

11.56 

Larere 

728 

1.8 

Medium 

684 

8.0 

16.80 

Extreme 

729 

3.2 

None 

685 

4.0 

16.65 

Larere 

730 

2.9 

Larire 

686 

3.0 

11.70 

731 

4.2 

687 

48 

13.76 

732 

2.5 

688 

4.0 

12.70 

733 

3.3 

Larere 

689 

2.9 

11.10 

Medium 

734 

3.6 

690 

3.6 

11.92 

735 

3  3 

None 

691 

4.4 

12.40 

736 

2.8 

Larere 

692 

2.5 

Larere 

737 

4.7 

693 

2.6 

738 

3.7 

None 

694 

2.4 

Medium 

739 

3.3 

« 

695 

3.1 

Small 

740 

3.5 

it 

696 

2.8 

Medium 

741 

2.2 

697 

4.4 

Extreme 

742 

3.9 

None 

698 

3.2 

Larere 

743 

2.8 

699 

3.2 

744 

4.5 

None 

700 

3.6 

Small 

745 

3.4 

(i 

701 

2.2 

10.79 

Medium 

746 

4  6 

702 

3  6 

11.92 

Small 

747 

3.0 

703 

3  0 

11.15 

H 

748 

3.0 

704 

*18.() 

749 

3.4 

70S 

1.7 

9.91 

Medium 

750 

2.7 

706 

2  4 

11.23 

Larg~e 

751 

3.1 

707 

1.5 

9.8 

Medium 

752 

*11.1 

708 

3.2 

11.59 

Trace 

753 

2.9 

709 

Larere 

754 

2.9 

710 

3.8- 

12.56 

Trace 

755 

1.9 

711 

3.6 

11.92 

756 

2.4 

712 

2.2 

10.06 

Small 

757 

3.0 

713 

4.0 

12  55 

(i 

758 

2.6 

714 

3.4 

11.83 

ft 

759 

1  5 

715 

*17.5 

760 

2.6 

716 

3.0 

11.47 

Medium 

761 

2.4 

717 

1.8 

10.41 

Larere 

762 

3.1 

*Cream. 

Of  these  84  samples,  35  percent  were  low  in  butter  fat.  Over 
67  percent  of  those  tested  for  total  solids  were  below  the  legal  12 
percent  standard.  Sixty-seven  were  examined  for  sediment  and  86 
percent  contained  a  visible  amount,  18  percent  being  small,  18  per- 
cent medium,  almost  30  percent  large,  and  7  percent  extreme.  There 
is  evidently  no  improvement  here  over  the  milk  collected  in  1905. 


50 


BULLETIN  No.   120. 


[November, 


TABLE  5.  THE  PERCENTAGE  OF  FAT  FOUND  IN  150  SAMPLES  OF  MILK 
COLLECTED,  DURING  THE  SUMMER  OF  1905,  IN  ONE  OF  THE  DISTRICTS  IN 
CHICAGO  WHERE  THE  POORER  WORKING  PEOPLE  L<IVE. 


Sample 
number. 

a 

«r| 

ri  a 

fa  a 

Sample 
number. 

1 

d 

<u 
•J~  ° 
rtfc 

—  o» 

Sample 
number. 

B 

V 

2* 

™  OJ 

fa  £ 

Sample 
number. 

B 
& 

W  flj 

,faa 

Sample 
number. 

B 

tffl 

TO  v 

fa  & 

7 

3.0 

40 

3.5 

116 

3.0 

224 

1.8 

273 

2.2 

8 

0.9 

41 

2.6 

117 

2.2 

225 

2.6 

274 

4.4 

9 

3.2 

42 

3.6 

118 

3.4 

226 

3.4 

275 

3.3 

10 

2.0 

43 

2.6 

119 

4.0 

227 

3.2 

276 

2.8 

11 

3.3 

71 

2.6 

134 

3.0 

234 

2.3 

277 

2.4 

12 

3.0 

72 

2.6 

135 

3.6 

235 

2.1 

278 

3.2 

13 

2.8 

73 

2.5 

136 

2.4 

236 

2.7 

279 

3.5 

14 

3.-0 

74 

2.4 

137 

4.0 

237 

2.6 

280 

3.1 

15 

3.8 

75 

3.6 

138 

2.1 

238 

2.9 

281 

2.5 

16 

2.6 

76 

3.5 

139 

3.6 

239 

2.9 

282 

1.8 

17 

3.2 

77 

4.0 

140 

3.0 

240 

2.8 

283 

2.8 

18 

3.1 

78 

3.4 

141 

3.0 

241 

34 

284 

3.2 

19 

2.4 

79 

3.0 

142 

1.8 

242 

3.3 

285 

2.4 

20 

2.3 

80 

2.0 

143 

3.6 

243 

2.3 

286 

4.1 

21 

2.7 

81 

2.8 

160 

3.0 

244 

3.2 

287 

2.6 

22 

1.3 

82 

3.2 

161 

2.6 

245 

2.8 

288 

2.9 

23 

3.0 

83 

1.5 

162 

3.5 

247 

3.1 

289 

3.2 

24 

3.2 

84 

2.7 

163 

1.8 

248 

3.0 

290 

2.6 

25 

2.0 

85 

2.4 

164 

2.8 

261 

2.6 

291 

4.1 

26 

3.0 

86 

2.1 

165 

2.4 

262 

3.1 

292 

3.2 

27 

4.0 

87 

3.2 

166 

2.3 

263 

2.5 

293 

3.0 

31 

3.0 

88 

2.7 

167 

3.1 

264 

1.8 

294 

3.0 

32 

3.2 

89 

3.0 

168 

2.8 

265 

2.2 

295 

3.5 

33 

3.2 

90 

3.7 

169 

1.7 

266 

2.5 

296 

3.1 

34 

3.2 

91 

2.0 

170 

2.3 

267 

2.6 

297 

3.7 

35 

2.5 

92 

2.7 

171 

2.4 

268 

1.8 

298 

4.2 

36  . 

3.0 

93 

3.0 

172 

1.6 

269 

3.0 

299 

3.4 

37 

2.4 

113 

2.9 

221 

4.3 

270 

3.0 

371 

2.0 

38 

3.9 

114 

3.5 

222 

3.2 

271 

3.0 

372 

2.8 

39 

1.9 

115 

2.2 

223 

2.4 

272 

3.0 

373 

2.6 

Seventy-five  samples  or  50  percent  of  all  are  below  the  legal 
standard  for  butter  fat. 

This  district  is  by  no  means  typical  of  the  poorest  sections  of 
the  city,  but  is  filled  with  busy  working  people  who  do  not  get  large 
wages.  It  is  largely  supplied  by  small  local  dealers.  Just  one- 
half  of  the  samples  of  milk  examined  were  found  below  grade 
in  butter  fat.  The  percentage  of  milk  below  grade  would  have 
been  still  higher  but  for  the  fact  that  some  of  these  samples  were 
taken  from  the  wagons  of  large  dealers  who  visited  the  section. 
Eight  samples  obtained  from  one  depot  within  three  months  were  all 
below  grade ;  the  lowest  contained  0.9  percent  of  butter  fat  and  the 
highest  2.7  percent,  the  average  being  1.78  percent.  Four  samples 
from  another  depot  averaged  only  1.77  percent;  seven  samples 
from  a  third  depot  tested  from  2.2  to  2.8  percent;  and  six  samples 


MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES.  51 

from  another  depot  ranged  from  1.9  to  2.4  percent.  But  even  in 
this  district  one  depot  was  found  from  which  six  samples  all  tested 
up  to  grade  and  averaged  3.74  percent.  These  cases  are  given  to 
show  that  the  finding  of  samples  below  grade  in  this  district  was 
by  no  means  an  accident.  The  evidence  of  systematic  skimming 
and  watering  of  the  milk  is  conclusive. 

EVIDENCES  OF  SKIMMING  AND  WATERING 

The  milk  as  it  comes  from  the  country  is  almost  universally  up 
to  grade.  It  will  average  3.5  to  4  percent  of  butter  fat.  The  small 
dealer  buys  one  or  more  cans  at  the  platform  when  the  train  is  un- 
loaded, takes  the  milk  to  his  depot  and  sets  it  in  a  tank  of  ice  water. 
The  cream  rises  in  the  can,  and  before  beginning  to  sell  the  milk, 
the  dealer  removes  one  or  two  quarts  of  cream,  which  is  sold  in 
small  quantities  at  a  good  price  and  furnishes  the  larger  part  of  the 
profit.  The  milk  remaining  in  the  can  is  stirred  up  and  sold  as 
whole  milk  at  six  cents  per  quart.  Frequently  water  is  added  to  take 
the  place  of  the  cream  removed. 

The  temptation  to  make  profits  in  this  way  overcomes  any  sys- 
tem of  inspection  that  the  city  has  yet  established  in  these  districts. 
By  this  means  the  poor  are  defrauded  by  people  of  their  own  class, 
and  half  nourished  children  are  fed  on  skimmed  and  watered  milk 
for  which  full  price  has  been  paid. 


A  larger  number  of  these  samples  would  have  been  below  grade 
if  the  dealers  had  not  been  suspicious  of  the  collector.  Frequently 
the  salesman  filled  the  collector's  bottle  to  within  an  inch  or  two  of 
the  top  from  a  large  can  of  milk  and  added  the  rest  from  a  smaller 
can  that  plainly  contained  cream.  It  was  a  common  occurrence  for 
the  collector  to  wait  his  turn  behind  children  who  we~e  buying  milk. 
It  often  happened  that  their  pitchers  were  filled  from  one  can,  and 
that  when  the  collector  stepped  up  he  would  be  eyed  sharply  and  a 
new  can  opened  from  which  to  fill  his  bottle.  In  many  cases  the 
milk  was  dipped  off  the  top  of  the  can  carefully,  without  stirring 
the  milk,  and  one  such  sample,  No.  712,  contained  only  2.2  percent 
of  fat  and  10.06  percent  of  total  solids.  In  one  case  after  the  bottle 
had  been  filled  and  the  collector  had  closed  it  with  a  paper  cap,  the 
saleswoman  appeared  suddenly  to  think  of  something  and  asked  for 
the  bottle.  It  was  returned  to  her,  whereupon  she  drew  a  hairpin 
from  a  frowzy  head,  and,  removing  the  cap  from  the  bottle  with 
the  pin,  poured  out  some  of  the  milk  and  filled  the  space  with  cream 
from  a  pitcher.  Replacing  the  cap,  she  handed  the  bottle  back  with 
a  cordial  smile,  remarking,  "I  give  you  good  milk."  This  sample 
(No.  664)  contained  5.1  percent  of  fat,  and  was  indeed  good  milk 


BULLETIN  No.   120. 


[November, 


so  far  as  richness  was  concerned.     A  reference  to  the  table  will 
show  that  it  was  also  rich  in  sediment. 

In  another  case,  a  depot  was  found  located  in  a  dark  kitchen. 
When  the  collector  called  for  milk,  the  saleswoman  was  busy  in  the 
kitchen  with  her  Monday's'  wash.  The  room'  was  full  of  steam  and 
the  odor  of  dirty  clothes.  With  her  hands  she  wiped  the  soapsuds 
off  each  arm  into  the  tub,  and  with  her  arms  still  wet  she  filled  the 
milk  bottle  from  a  can  standing  in  a  tank  near  the  cook  stove.  This 
sample  (No.  468),  contained  2.9  percent  of  fat,  was  off  flavor  when 
bought,  and  contained  a  small  amount  of  sediment. 

TABI.E  6.  THE  PERCENTAGE  OP  FAT  IN  95  SAMPLES  OF  MILK  COL- 
LECTED DURING  THE  SUMMER  OF  1905  IN  ONE  OK  THE  RICHER  DISTRICTS 
OF  CHICAGO. 


Sample 
number. 

c 

0> 

*T  ° 
rt  <u 

to  cu 

m  ^ 

•5J! 
£E 
rt  3 
co  a 

Fat, 
percent. 

— 

Sample 
number. 

a 
s 

ll 

fa  a 

«  Si 
3J 

eg 
a  » 

CO  B 

Fat, 
percent. 

Sample 
nuMber 

•4-i 

4-1 

£a 

47 

3.5 

174 

3.8 

309 

3.6 

430 

4.0 

550 

3.8 

48 

3.5 

175 

3.4 

310 

3.4 

431 

3.2 

551 

4.6 

51 

3.2 

182 

3.7 

311 

3.6 

478 

3.6 

552 

3.8 

55 

3.6 

188 

3.3 

312 

3.8 

522 

3.8 

554 

4.4 

56 

3.4 

189 

36 

313 

3.4 

523 

3.2 

555 

4.2 

58 

3.4 

190 

3.4 

314 

4.4 

524 

3.4 

556 

3-9 

60 

3.6 

191 

3.6 

315 

3.4 

525 

3.2 

557 

3.9 

67 

3.4 

192 

3.6 

319 

3.5 

526 

3.2 

634 

3.8 

68 

3.0 

195 

3.7 

327 

3.5 

527 

3.6 

635 

3.8 

69 

3.8 

217 

3.6 

328 

3.0 

528 

4.0 

636 

3.3 

70 

3.9 

218 

3.5 

416 

2.8 

529 

3.8 

637 

3.9 

97 

3.4 

219 

3.7 

417 

3.0 

530 

3.2 

638 

3.8 

99 

3.5 

251 

3.7 

418 

3.6 

531 

2.4 

639 

3.7 

101 

3.8 

254 

3.5 

419 

3.3 

532 

3.4 

640 

2.8 

104 

3.9 

301 

3.8 

420 

3.8 

533 

2.8 

641 

3.9 

105 

3.4. 

304 

3.7 

421 

6.3 

534 

2.8 

642 

2.9 

106 

3.0 

305 

3.1 

422 

3.8 

535 

3.2 

643 

3.3 

108 

3.6 

306 

3.4 

428 

2.8 

536 

3.8 

644 

3.2 

109 

3.4 

307 

3.8 

427 

3.2 

537 

38 

645 

2.4 

Of  these  95  samples  from  one  district  only  9  percent  are  be- 
low grade. 

CONDITIONS  IN  THE:  BETTER  DISTRICTS. 

Table  6  should  be  compared  with  Table  5.  The  samples  of  milk 
reported  in  Table  6  were  collected  in  a  residence  district  of  rich 
people  and  well-to-do  artisans.  Here  only  9  percent  of  the  milk 
was  found  below  grade,  while  in  the  poorer  district,  represented  in 
Table  5,  50  percent  of  the  milk  was  below  grade.  The  richer  dis- 
trict was  for  the  most  part  served  by  the  wagons  of  the  best  large 
dealers,  who  always  handle  a  good  grade  of  milk.  The  fact  that 
9  percent  was  found  below  grade  shows  that  there  is  still  room  for 
improvement.  The  amount  of  sediment  found  here  was  much  less 


IQ07-]          MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES.  53 

than  in  the  poorer  districts,  but  it  was  by  no  means  entirely  absent. 
The  noticeable  thing  revealed  by  these  two  tables  is  that  the  poor 
people  who  needed  the  best  of  nourishment  paid  almost  as  much  for 
poor  milk  as  the  rich  people  paid  for  good  milk. 

VERY  LITTLE  FORMALDEHYDE  FOUND 

The  absence  of  preservatives  was  plainly  noticeable  in  Chicago 
milk.  Very  few  samples  were  found  to  contain  formaldehyde,  the 
most  commonly  used  preservative,  and  the  only  one  for  which  tests 
were  made.  The  fact  that  the  City  Health  Department  has  been 
able  to  teach  the  dealers  that  it  is  not  safe  to  use  preservatives  in- 
dicates that  the  low  percentage  of  fat,  the  dirty  depots,  and  the  prac- 
ice  of  skimming  could  be  done  away  with  if  a  little  more  effort  were 
expended  in  that  direction. 

CONDITIONS  NOT  SHOWN  IN  HEALTH  DEPARTMENT  REPORT 

The  bulletin  of  the  Chicago  Health  Department  for  the  week 
ending  March  25,  1905,  says:  "The  milk  situation  is  very  satisfac- 
tory at  an  unsatisfactory  season.  Of  the  820  samples  of  milk  and 
cream  analyzed  in  the  laboratory  during  the  week,  only  14  of  milk 
and  30  of  cream  were  found  below  grade,  a  proportion  of  5.8  per- 
cent." Undoubtedly  this  is  a  correct  report  of  the  samples  tested. 
The  defect  in  such  a  report  is  that  it  does  not  say  where  the  samples 
were  collected.  If  the  samples  were  taken  from  the  cans  as  soon  as 
they  were  unloaded  from  the  train,  or  if  they  were  collected  from 
the  wagons  of  the  best  big  dealers,  nearly,  if  not  all,  the  milk  would 
be  found  up  to  grade.  But  \vhen  the  writer  collected  milk  from  the 
dealers  as  it  was  sold  to  the  people,  he  found  it  impossible  to  get 
any  large  number  of  samples  that  did  not  show  a  greater  percent 
below  grade  than  was  reported  by  the  Health  Department.  Re- 
ports as  to  the  milk  supply  of  a  large  city  like  Chicago  should  state 
how  and  where  the  samples  were  collected. 

CONDITIONS  IN  TWENTY-SIX  SMALLER  CITIES 

The  milk  conditions  in  the  twenty-six  smaller  cities  visited  were 
found  less  satisfactory  than  in  Chicago.  Much  more  formaldehyde 
was  discovered  and  a  larger  proportion  of  samples  contained  sedi- 
ment.. A  great  deal  of  criticism  is  always  heard  of  the  food  sup- 
plies of  large  cities.  But  the  chances  of  getting  good  milk,  by  any- 
one who  knows  the  requirements  of  such  milk,  are  better  in  Chicago, 
than  in  any  of  the  twenty-six  cities  of  10,000  to  60,000  population 
in  Illinois.  Here  again  is  shown  the  good  that  may  be  accom- 
plished by  inspection.  The  majority  of  the  smaller  cities  have  little 
or  no  inspection,  and  the  dairymen  and  dealers  have  failed  to  bring 
the  milk  up  to  a  high  standard.  The  percent  of  butter  fat  averages 
higher  than  it  does  in  some  districts  of  Chicago,  but  the  amount  of 
sediment  is  very  large. 


54 


BULLETIN  No.  120. 


[November, 


TABLE  7.  THE  PERCENTAGE  OF  BUTTER  FAT,  TOTAL  SOLIDS,  AND 
AMOUNT  OP  SEDIMENT  IN  SAMPLES  OF  MILK  COLLECTED  IN  26  ILLINOIS 
CITIES  OF  MORE  THAN  10,000  POPULATION  DURING  THE  SUMMER  OF  1906. 


<u  C 

is 
ss 

d  3 

CB  a 

*r§ 

£l 

_.  »  a 

31  § 

c2°  2 
H  ai  P< 

a     g 

3«w  e 

o  o.S 
£     •« 
J?     u 

<!          !B 

Sample 
number. 

Fat, 
percent. 

_,  a>  a 

3sS 

-°°  a 

E-i  ai  ft 

*  i 

Ss-  a 
ooS 
£     =0 
<     % 

763 

3.8 

13.06 

813 

3.3 

Medium 

764 

4.4 

13.83 

814 

4.3 

Small 

765 

4.0 

13.70 

815 

3.1 

Medium 

766 

3.0 

11.60 

816 

3.6 

Trace 

767 

4.0 

12.30 

817 

3.5 

Medium 

768 

4.4 

'  818 

3.4 

769 

4.6 

12.52 

819 

3.7 

770 

3.6 

11.57 

820 

3.1 

771 

3.4 

11.15 

821 

2.2 

772 

5.0 

**13.75 

822 

3.7 

773 

3  6 

15.52 

823 

*19.0 

774 

3.8 

12.57 

824 

4.6 

775 

5.4 

14.10 

825 

4.2 

776 

4.1 

826 

4.6 

777 

4.0 

11.05 

827 

3.5 

778 

3.6 

**12.32 

828 

3.7 

779 

4.0 

** 

829 

3.3 

780 

3.6 

830 

4.4 

Small 

781 

3.1 

831 

4.8 

782 

3.6 

832 

0.4 

783 

3.6 

833 

3.8 

Larere 

784 

3.8 

834 

4.3 

785 

3.0 

835 

4.7 

Small 

786 

4.0 

836 

1.2 

787 

3.8 

837 

3.6 

11  77 

Larere 

788 

3.4 

838 

4  5 

12.15 

None 

789 

4.5 

839 

*21.0 

Extreme 

790 

1.4 

840 

4.2 

12.91 

791 

4.1 

841 

8.0 

792 

2.4 

842 

3.4 

12.68 

Small 

793 

2.9 

843 

4.4 

None 

794 

4.2 

844 

4.0 

12.50 

795 

3.1 

845 

2.0 

796 

3.8 

846 

3.7 

11  69 

797 

3  8 

Medium 

847 

3  6 

11.92 

Large 

798 

3.2 

848 

3.6 

11.87 

Small 

799 

3.9 

Large 

849 

4.3 

12.58 

800 

4.3 

None 

850 

3.4 

11.53 

Medium 

801 

3.4 

.  < 

851 

3.1 

10.42 

Small 

802 

4  0 

Small 

852 

2.9 

11.03 

803 

3.6 

** 

ii 

853 

3.2 

804 

2.0 

K 

854 

3.8 

12.06 

Larere 

805 

2.6 

i< 

855 

3.2 

10.84 

Medium 

806 

2  0 

i< 

856 

Larire 

807 

3.0 

857 

4.2 

12.81 

808 

3  0 

**• 

None 

858 

4.4 

809 

3.8 

Small 

859 

5.4 

13.90 

810 

4.1 

860 

2.9 

**10.03 

811 

3.4 

Medium 

861 

3.6 

10.99 

812 

3.6 

Trace 

862 

3.2 

10.76 

**Formaldehyde.     *Cream. 

The  total  solids  and  amounts  of  sediment  are  reported  in  all  samples  of 
sufficient  quantity.  Of  samples  collected  on  tables  of  hotels  and  restaur- 
ants this  was  manifestly  impossible,  hence  the  blanks  in  Tables  4  and  7. 


MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES. 
TABLE  7.    CONTINUED. 


55 


4)  U 

P-H      0) 
C.,0 

Bg 

rt  3 
CO  C 

Fat. 
percent. 

•*J 

-»s 

fl2  8 

<2°£ 

H  «i  o< 

tJ     c 
c      <a 

3m  C 

o  0.5 

S     -d 
J?      «• 

<          01 

Sample 
number. 

S 

«l| 

*£ 

<*  a 

-"»! 

2-2 
H  en  o< 

8       g 
SHI  C 
0  0  K 

s  •« 

j?         v 

<<      01 

863 

3.6 

12  22 

913 

3.2 

11.26 

None 

864 

3.8 

11.96 

914 

2.4 

10.65 

Small 

865 

3.3 

12.06 

915 

3  4 

11.53 

Medium 

866 

3.8 

12.38 

916 

3.3 

11.46 

867 

4.6 

13.07 

917 

3.4 

11.50 

Small 

868 

4.0 

12.75 

918 

3.8 

11.86 

« 

869 

4.2 

12.84 

919 

3.0 

870 

4.0 

12.85 

920 

2.6 

• 

871 

4.4 

12.88 

921 

3.5 

11.47 

Small 

872 

3.4 

11.78 

922 

3.6 

12.09 

873 

4.7 

13.44 

923 

3.6 

12.24 

Medium 

874- 

2..  9 

11.13 

924 

7.4 

15.15 

Small 

875 

no.  s 

925 

2.4 

**  9.78 

Medium 

876 

4.0 

12.50 

926 

4.3 

12.56 

« 

877 

7.4 

15.48 

927 

1.7 

9.56 

« 

878 

3.0 

928 

2.0 

9.27 

None 

879 

3.4 

11.58 

929 

3.9 

11.80 

Medium 

880 

2.7 

10.69 

930 

3.4 

11.55 

881 

*15.0 

931 

2  4 

10.13 

Small 

882 
883 
884 
885 

3.4 
5.0 
3  2 
3.4 

11.33 
13.55 
11.29 

Medium 
Large 
Medium 

932 
933 
934 
935 

4.1 
4.1 
3.2 
1.6 

12.22 
12.29 
10.81 

« 

« 

None 

886 

2.6 

936 

4.0 

None 

887 
888 
889 
890 

3.8 
1.4 
3.9 
1.8 

12.03 
10.23 
12.50 
10.43 

Large 
Medium 
Small 
Larere 

937 
938 
939 
940 

4.0 
4.4 

4.4 
3.4 

12.05 
12.85 
12.86 

Medium 
Small 
Medium 

891 

4  0 

941 

3.7 

Extreme 

892 

*18.2 

942 

5.2 

Small 

893 

3.6 

12.07 

Medium 

943 

3.4 

Medium 

894 

1.4 

9.98 

944 

3.9 

Small 

895 

3.4 

11.78 

ti 

945 

4.4 

896 

2.9 

10.83 

Larere 

946 

3.5 

« 

897 

2.0 

947 

4.2 

Small 

898 

3.8 

12.31 

Small 

948 

3.8 

M-edium 

899 
900 
901 

3.5 
3.8 
1  8 

11.57 
12.43 

Large 

949 
950 
951 

2.0 
4.8 
3.1 

10.25 
**12.96 
10.74 

Small 
(i 

902 
903 
904 
905 
906 
907 
908 
909 
910 
911 
912 

4.2 
4.0 
3.0 
3.6 
3.5 
3  9 
2.9 
4.3 
3.6 
4.5 
3.3 

12.79 
**12.42 
11.35 
11.87 
11.95 
12.15 
10.93 
12.53 
11.74 
12.94 
11.36 

Medium 
« 

Large 
Small 

Medium 

it 

Small 
Medium 
Large 
Medium 

952 
953 
954 
955 
956 
957 
958 
959 
960 
961 
962 

3  0 
3.4 
4.0 
1.0 
3.0 
4.4 
3.6 
4.8 
2.6 
3.2 
3.3 

11.10 
11.58 
12.30 
**  9.60 
11.70 
12.68 
**12.07 
12.26 
10.42 
10.34 
**12.59 

Small 
« 

it 

(4 

Medium 
Large 
Medium 
Small 
Trace 
Extreme 

**Formaldehyde.     *Cream. 


56 


BULLETIN  No.   120. 
TABI<E  7.    CONTINUED. 


[November, 


ii 

ii 

X  = 

Fat, 
percent. 

III 

111 

1    ^ 

3u-i  a 

O  O  8 

a   £ 

«?      u 

<         01 

2% 
a.o 

SE 

«  3 

•J.  a 

-M 
d 

V 

£1 

fe  o. 

—  «i 

s-d  g 
11  & 

s     g 

§-ss 

E    '•*> 
0     S 

963 
964 

3.0 

2.7 

11.02 
9.94 

Small 

1013 
1014 

1.8 

9.78 

Large 
Small 

965 
966 
967 
968 
969 
970 

1.8 
4.4 
0.2 
2.8 
2.5 
3.0 

**10.16 

12.18 
9.34 
8.06 
10.20 
**10.5S 

None 
Extreme 
Small 

None 
Larcrp 

1015 
1016 
1017 
1018 
1019 
1020 

3.2 
3.5 
2.4 

3.2 
3.4 

10.96 
**11.70 

8.93 
10.26 
9.45 

Trace 
Ivarge 

Small 
d 

None 
Small 

971 

3.8 

**11.66 

Small 

1021 

2.4 

Medium 

972 
973 

3.2 
3.4 

10.61 

Large 

1022 
1023 

2.4 
3.5 

10.25 
11.70 

None 
Medium 

974 

3.8 

1024 

4.0 

10.42 

975 

4.0 

Medium 

1025 

3.6 

11.32 

c, 

976 

3.4 

** 

1026 

4.0 

12.05 

Small 

977 

3.0 

T^Trtr^tne 

1027 

4.5 

12.90 

Medium 

978 

0.2 

1028 

3  4 

11.58 

Large 

979 

3.6 

None 

1029 

4.6 

12.52 

Medium 

980 
981 
982 
983 

3.6 

3.8 
3.2 
3.5 

**11.57 
11.68 
10.71 
11.57 

Large 
Medium 

Small 

1030 
1031 
1032 
1033 

3.6 
6.6 

4.2 
3.0 

11.32 

15.22 
**12.54 
11.92 

Small 
Medium 

984 

4.0 

12.55 

Medium 

1034 

2.0 

10.10 

985 

3.4 

**11.33 

T^TrfPttlf 

1035 

*12.S 

986 

3.4 

11.20 

1036 

0  8 

9.58 

987 

3.8 

11.65 

1037 

3.6 

11.82 

988 

3.2 

*# 

1038 

2.8 

11.23 

989 

1.2 

1039 

*22.0 

990 

Trace 

1040 

1.4 

10.08 

991 

3.2 

11.09 

Small 

1041 

*18.0 

992 

3.2 

11.31 

1042 

5.6 

11.37 

993 

2.6 

**10.74 

Medium 

1043 

*11.5 

994 

Small 

1044 

2.2 

995 

3.4 

11.58 

« 

1045 

3.2 

11.71 

996 

3.2 

11.34 

(i 

1046 

0.4 

7.35 

997 

3.0 

11  10 

« 

1047 

2.6 

10  62 

998 

'  2.6 

1048 

2.3 

10.76 

999 

*23.0 

1049 

*22.0 

1000 

6.5 

13.67 

None 

1050 

0.2 

1001 

3.4 

10.93 

1051 

*21.0 

1002 

4.4 

12.48 

1052 

3.5 

12.0 

1003 

3.8 

11.71 

1053 

4.0 

11.35 

Medium 

1004 

3.6 

11.07 

Trace 

1054 

3.4 

11.10 

1005 
1006 

3.4 

11.47 

Medium 
Small 

1055 
1056 

3.2 
3.6 

11.79 
11  92 

Small 

1007 

2.8 

9.11 

Medium 

1057 

3.0 

10.72 

1008 
1'09 
1010 
1011 

1.8 
2.8 
4.2 
2.8 

**  8.16 
9.41 

12.54 
**  8.73 

Small 
Large 
Extreme 

1058 
1059 
1060 
1061 

3.8 
3.2 
2.8 
3.6 

11.68 
11.71 
10.98 
11.94 

Medium 
Small 

1012 

2.0 

10.02 

Large 

1062 

5.8 

14.08 

Small 

**Formaldehyde.     *Cream. 


jpo/.]          MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES. 
.  TABLE  7,  CONTINUED 


57 


a;  C 
ft3 
Eg 

rt  3 

cn  a 

•     c 

A 

«£ 
b  s. 

_  in  B 

ii 

Hen  a 

_      c 
a      j> 

8*1 

si 

«<J    cn 

a  C 

—  V 

CW2 

E5 

<S  3 

cn  a 

a 
<o 

*f  U 

tl  1" 

e& 

-  BJ  « 

31  § 

E"1   CO   ft 

B       1 

3  "4-.    C 

o^.S 

s  "a 

3     S 

1063 

4.0 

12.85 

Small 

1086 

3.3 

Small 

1064 

3.2 

11.64 

1087 

3.8 

1065 

4.0 

12.57 

Non  e 

1088 

4.0 

» 

1066 

4.4 

12.98 

Small 

1089 

4.6 

» 

1067 

3.6 

12.19 

1090 

1.4 

None 

1068 

*30.0 

1091 

3.0 

1069  ' 

*23.0 

1092 

3.7 

Small 

1070 

4.0 

12.54 

Small 

1093 

2.5 

1071 

3.8 

11.76 

>» 

1094 

3.0 

1072 

4.6 

13.02 

» 

1095 

2.0 

1073 

2.8 

11.31 

1096 

3.0 

1074 

2.8 

11.41 

Small 

1097 

3.6 

None 

1075 

5.3 

1098 

3.6 

1076 

3.0 

11.55 

Medium 

1099 

3.6 

1077 
1078 

3.6 
2.6 

11.27 

>» 

1100 
1101 

4.0 
40 

12.50 
12.40 

Large 
None 

1079 
1080 
1081 

3.6 
3.4 

3.4 

11.87 
11.48 
11.95 

Extreme 
None 
L/arge 

1102 
1103 
1104 

4.2 
3.6 

12.44 
11.93 

Small 
Large 
Small 

1082 
1083 

2.8 
3.6 

11  21 

»> 

1105 
1106 

3.4 
3.6 

11.43 
]1  67 

» 
Large 

1084 

3.4 

Medium 

1107 

3.4 

12.08 

» 

1085 

3.6 

Small 

*Cream. 

This  table  contains  325  tests  of  milk.  Nineteen  percent  are  be- 
low the  legal  standard  for  butter  fat.  Of  the  209  samples  tested  for 
total  solids,  63  percent  are  below  the  standard.  Two  hundred 
twelve  samples  were  examined  for  sediment  and  88  percent  con- 
tained a  visible  amount.  Twenty-four  samples  or  7  percent  con- 
tained formaldehyde. 

ONE  OF  THE  WORST  DEPOTS 

A  large  proportion  of  the  milk  sold  ii}  the  smaller  cities  is  deliv- 
ered to  the  consumer  by  the  dairyman  who  produces  it.  The  milk 
depots  are  no  better  than  those  in  Chicago.  One  large  company  in 
a  city  of  at  least  30,000  population  had  a  very  filthy  salesroom  in 
the  front  part  of  its  bottling  plant.  This  room  had  a  rotten  floor 
which  was  strewn  so  deep  with  an  accumulation  of  dust,  cinders, 
scraps  of  paper  and  discarded  bottle-caps  that  this  rubbish  was 
scraped  up  in  piles  by  the  feet  of  the  attendants  as  they  walked. 
On  floor  and  counter  were  puddles  of  spilled  milk  upon  which  the 
flies  descended  in  such  numbers  as  to  blacken  spots  a  foot  square. 
The  unsanitary  condition  of  this  place  could  hardly  be  exaggerated. 
The  health  commissioner  in  the  city  assured  the  collector  that  the 


58  BULLETIN  No.  120.  [November, 

i 

milk  situation  was  being  looked  after  vigorously  and  that  no  milk 
below  grade  could  be  found.  In  an  hour's  walk  seven  samples  were 
collected,  six  of  which  were  below  grade  in  butter  fat,  two  contained 
formaldehyde,  and  all  but  one  contained  sediment. 

FEW  CLEAN  BARNS 

Very  little  of  the  milk  supplied  to  these  cities  was  produced  in 
improved  or  sanitary  dairies.  The  cow  barns  and  the  condition  of 
the  cows  themselves,  as  witnessed  by  the  writer,  were  often  "a  dis- 
grace to  civilized  people.  Dark  stables  with  no  -ventilation  were 
seen  frequently ;  also,  cows  lying  and  standing  on  dirty  plank  floors 
without  bedding,  and  on  earth  floors  trampled  full  of  ruts  where 
liquid  manure  was  standing.  One  man  with  a  herd  of  50  cows 
supplying  milk  to  a  town  of  10,000  inhabitants,  was  asked  if  he 
would  like  to  have  his  customers  see  how  the  milk  was  produced. 
He  dropped  his  head  and  admitted  that  the  less  he  advertised  his 
place  the  better  off  he  was. 

CONDITIONS  WITHOUT  AN  EXCUSE 

In  this  day  when  spitting  on  the  sidewalks  is  forbidden,  when 
some  of  our  best  grocery  firms  examine  their  clerks  every  morning 
to  see  whether  or  not  their  clothes  are  clean,  when  thousands  of 
dollars  are  spent  to  make  dry-goods  stores  light  and  sanitary,  we 
permit  men  to  handle,  in  dusty,  dirty,  filthy,  and  foul  smelling 
stables,  the  milk  which  we  and  our  children  are  to  drink.  We  per- 
mit men  with  colds  and  coughs  to  expectorate  on  the  feed  the  cows 
are  to  eat,  and  on  every  part  of  the  floor  where  the  milk  is  handled. 
Men  in  dirty  clothes  that  have  done  service  for  months  without 
washing,  sit  down  by  cows  whose  thighs  and  udders  are  covered 
with  manure,  and  proceed  to  milk  into  a  pail  fourteen  inches  in 
diameter.  The  writer  has  repeatedly  observed  these  conditions  the 
past  two  years,  and  they  were  found  in  three  out  of  five  herds  vis- 
ited on  one  day  within  two  weeks  of  the  time  of  this  writing.. 

FILTH  THE  MOST  DANGEROUS 

The  use  of  preservatives,  although  bad  enough,  is  not  nearly  so 
serious  a  question  as  that  of  unclean  milk.  No  doubt  children  are 
occasionally  killed  by  the  use  of  preservatives,  but  the  number  who 
die  each  year  from  a  continual  use  of  dirty  milk  is  enormous.  The 


I907-] 


MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES. 


59 


correctness  of  this  statement  has  been  proved  by  the  work  of  such 
men  as  Nathan  Straus  in  New  York  City  and  Dr.  G.  W.  Goler  in 
Rochester,  New  York.* 

Much  has  been  written  against  the  milkman  because  a  few  cases 
of  scarlet  fever  are  traced  to  the  milk  supply,  but  these  cases  are 
as  nothing  when  compared  with  the  total  amount  of  sickness  and 
the  number  of  deaths  occurring  each  year  in  every  city  in  the  land 
as  a  direct  result  of  filthy  methods  of  producing  and  handling  milk. 

However,  in  pleasing  contrast,  several  places  were  visited  where 
the  cows  were  stabled  in  clean,  light,  well-ventilated  barns  with 
cement  floors  and  dust  proof  ceilings,  and  the  cows  themselves  were 
well  bedded  and  kept  clean. 

TABLE;  8.  THE  PERCENTAGE  OF  FAT  IN  SAMPLES  OF  MILK  Coi, 
LECTED  IN  HOTELS  AND  RESTAURANTS  IN  28  ILLINOIS  CITIES  DURING  1905 
AND  1906. 


V  1- 

^ 

a  C 

•s  jj 

a 

gj 

a  a) 
PgS 

a 

f!     1) 

0..0 

§ 

"a.0 

a 

flj 

—  -. 

& 

B 

£E 

ifg 

SE 

~S 

EE 

*ry 

SS 

EE 

rt  3 

f*  <y 

rt  3 

rt  <u 

rt  s 

rt  • 

rt  3 

Cd  ju 

cj  3 

^  S 

CO  S 

fe  Qi 

CO  = 

fa  =- 

co  a 

fa  ft 

X  d 

fa  PI  ' 

w  a 

fa  a 

1 

3  0 

731 

4.2 

845 

2.0 

967 

0.3 

1046 

0.4 

2 

3.0 

732 

2.5 

853 

3.2 

977 

3.0 

1047 

2.6 

3 

3  3 

734 

3.6 

885 

3.4 

978 

0.2 

1048 

2.3 

4 

3.2 

741 

2.2 

886 

2.6 

988 

3.2 

1050 

0.2 

5 

2.2 

743 

2.8 

888 

1.4 

989 

1.2 

1078 

2.6 

6 

3.9 

798 

3.2 

890 

1.8 

997 

3.0 

1079 

3.6 

110 

2.8 

804 

2.0 

897 

2.0 

998 

2.6 

1081 

3.4 

111 

2.9 

805 

2.6 

898 

3.8 

1008 

1.8 

1082 

2.8 

132 

3.3 

806 

2.0 

901 

1.8 

1021 

2.4 

1090 

1.4 

133 

3.0 

807 

3.0 

919 

3.0 

1033 

3.0 

1091 

3.0 

300 

1.6 

812 

3.6 

920 

2.6 

1036 

0.8 

1093 

2.5 

368 

3.0 

832 

0.4 

935 

1.6 

1038 

2.8 

1096 

3.0 

726 

2.8 

836 

1.2 

955 

1.0 

1040 

1.4 

1108 

1.0 

728 

1.8 

841 

8.0 

965 

1.8 

1044 

2.2 

1109 

1.2 

This  table  reports  70  tests,  of  which  44  or  63  percent  are  below 
grade  in  butter  fat. 

Table  8  shows  samples  collected  in  hotels  and  restaurants  in  all 
the  Illinois  cities  visited,  including  Chicago.  Of  these,  63  percent 
were  low  in  fat.  Many  samples  secured  from  glasses  of  milk  served 
at  the  table  were  found  to  be  separator-skimmed  milk.  Serving 
such  milk- is  a  violation  of  the  laws  of  Illinois.  This  milk  is  paid 
for  at  a  high  rate,  never  less  than  20  cents  per  quart,  and  selling 
skimmed  milk  at  such  a  price  is  downright  and  insolent  robbery. 
Of  two  samples  obtained  at  the  table  in  one  of  the  largest  and 
highest-priced  hotels  in  Chicago,  one  contained  2.2  percent  of  fat, 


*See  "But  a  Thousand  a  Year,"  by  Dr.  Goler,  and  "The  Influence  of  a  Pure  Milk  Supply 
on  the  Death  Rate  of  Children"  by  Mr.  Straus. 


66  BULLETIN  No.  120.  [November, 

and  the  other  2.8  percent.     And  this  milk  was  paid  for  at  the  rate 
of  ten  cents  per  glass  or  forty  cents  per  quart. 

THE  DIFFICULTIES  OF  THE  CASE 

Milk  is  a  standard  food  in  every  family,  and  for  little  children 
and  some  invalids  it  is  a  positive  necessity.  Considering  the  sur- 
roundings in  which  milk  must  be  produced  and  handled,  it  is  pe- 
culiarly difficult  ta  keep  it  clean.  Milk  is  an  excellent  medium  for 
the  growth  of  germs  which  are  everywhere  present,  and  the  hot 
months  are  the  most  favorable  to  bacterial  growth.  The  death  rate 
of  any  city  will  show  that  more  children  die  during  July  and  August 
than  at  any  other  time  of  the  year,  and  that  a  majority  of  them  die 
from  bowel  trouble.  What  has  already  been  accomplished  toward 
furnishing  children  with  pure  milk  during  the  summer  months  has 
greatly  reduced  this  mortality.  It  is  plainly  the  duty  of  every  city 
and  of  every  citizen  to  see  that  the  contamination  of  milk  is  reduced 
to  the  lowest  possible  point. 

WHY  IMPROVEMENT  COMES  SLOWLY 

It  no  doubt  costs  more  money  to  produce  clean  milk  than  to 
supply  the  usual  quality,  and  the  dairyman  thinks  he  cannot  afford 
to  improve  his  conditions.  Consumers  are  desperately  afraid  of  an 
increase  in  the  cost  of  this  food.  The  fear  that  the  price  of  milk 
would  be  advanced  has  kept  many  a  city  council  from  passing  an 
ordinance  requiring  adequate  milk  inspection,  and  it  also  has  pre- 
vented health  commissioners  from  enforcing  inspection  ordinances. 
Such  an  attitude  is  manifestly  absurb.  Milk  is  one  of  the  cheapest 
foods  on  the  table.  The  idea  that  great  outlay  for  equipment  is 
necessary  to  produce  clean  milk  is  also  erroneous.  Milk  of  the  best 
quality  may  be  produced  in  an  ordinary  barn  if  the  proper  care  be 
taken.  The  trouble  has  not  been  lack  of  expensive,  equipment,  but 
lack  of  clean  methods. 


REQUIREMENTS  FOR  CLEAN  MILK. 

HEALTHY  Cows 

All  cows  that  are  weak,  extremely  thin,  and  coughing  must  be 
removed  from  the  herd.  Milk  from  unhealthy  cows  is  not  safe  to 
use,  and  only  cows  in  good  health  can  make  profitable  use  of  the 
food  given  them.  The  herd  should  be  inspected  at  regular  inter- 
vals by  a  competent  veterinarian. 


/po/.]          MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES.  61 

HEALTHFUL,  BUILDINGS 

It  is  necessary  to  have  healthful  buildings  and  to  keep  them 
clean,  but  such  buildings  need  not  be  expensive.  The  four  essen- 
tials are  light,  ventilation,  a  proper  floor,  and  a  comfortable  tie. 
Window  glass  is  almost  as  cheap  as  lumber.  The  King  system  of 
ventilation  can  be  installed  by  any  carpenter  or  by  the  farmer  him- 
self at  the  cost  of  'a  few  feet  of  lumber  and  a  few  days'  work.  A 
cement  floor  is  but  little  more  expensive  than  a  good  wood  floor, 
and  is  many  times  more  durable.  Planks  laid  over  the  cement  where 
the  cows  stand  will  prevent  injury  to  the  animals.  A  comfortable 
tie  is  only  a  little  more  expensive  than  an  awkward  rigid  stanchion. 
A  good  swing  stanchion  is  not  uncomfortable  to  the  cow.  All  of 
these  things  could  be  put  into  the  ordinary  Illinois  barn  with  but 
little  trouble,  and  would  pay  for  themselves  in  less  than  a  year  in 
the  increased  efficiency  of  the  herd. 

THE  BARNYARD 

Much  of  the  dirt  in  milk  comes  from  the  barnyard.  The  cows 
wade  knee  deep  in  mud  and  manure  and  carry  this  filth  into  the  barn 
on  their  legs,  tails  and  udders.  It  is  difficult  to  clean  off  and  the 
careless  milker  makes  little  attempt  to  prevent  the  constant  shower 
of  dirt  falling  into  the  pail.  The  yard  should  be  well  drained  and 
graded  up  with  cinders  or  gravel.  If  drainage  cannot  be  obtained 
in  any  other  way,  the  rule  should  be,  raise  the  barn  and  grade 
up  to  it. 

CLEANING  THE  Cows 

Before  milking  the  cows  should  be  gone  over  with  a  brush  and 
all  loose  particles  of  dirt  removed.  This  need  not  take  more  than 
thirty  seconds  per  cow.  The  cow's  udder  comes  in  contact  with  the 
floor  and  cannot  be  cleaned  by  simply  brushing.  It  is  very  import- 
ant that  the  udder  should  be  washed  with  a  damp  sponge  or  cloth, 
and  this  may  take  thirty  seconds  more.  The  sponging  will  be  doubly 
effective  if  the  long  hairs  around  the  teat  and  lower  part  of  the 
udder  are  cut  short.  Each  man  who  is  to  milk  twelve  or  fifteen 
cows  will  need  to  spend  twelve  or  fifteen  minutes  in  cleaning  them 
This  cleaning  is  very  simple  and  inexpensive,  and  yet  nine  out  of 
ten  farmers  scout  the  idea  as  preposterous.  Every  farmer  will 
spend  hours  cleaning  his  horses,  because  he  is  ashamed  to  have  the 
public  see  them  dirty.  It  would  be  much  more  reasonable  to  spend 
less  time  cleaning  his  horses  and  more  time  cleaning  the  animals 
that  produce  the  milk  his  children  are  to  drink.  It  is  time  for  the 


62  BULLETIN  No.   120.  [November, 

consumer  to  demand  that  every  individual  dairyman  supplying  milk 
for  city  consumption  shall  use  at  least  common  decency  in  its  pro- 
duction. 

Clean  cows,  clean  clothes,  and  clean  dry  hands  for  the  milker 
should  be  the  unvarying  rule  of  every  dairy.  Special  milking  suits 
should  be  worn  and  frequently  washed. 

UTENSILS 

A  small-topped  pail  would  prevent  a  large  amount  of  dirt  from 
falling  into  the  milk.  Pails,  cans,  strainers,  coolers,  and  every  other 
utensil  that  comes  in  contact  with  the  milk  should  be  washed  clean 
and  sterilized.  Sterilizing  means  heating  to  21 2°F.  It  may  be  done 
by  boiling  water  or  by  steam.  It  cannot  be  done  by  starting  with 
boiling  water  in  one  can  and  pouring  it  from  can  to  can  to  clean 
half  a  dozen.  The  easiest  way  to  do  thorough  work  is  to  use  steam. 

COOLJNG  THE  MILK 

Even  with  the  best  of  care,  a  great  many  germs  will  fall  into 
the  milk ;  these  will  do  little  harm  if  they  are  kept  from  growing, 
and  this  can  be  accomplished  by  cooling  the  milk  quickly  and  keep- 
ing it  cold.  The  best  results  require  that  the  cooling  tank  be  kept 
down  to  5O°F.  If  the  well  water  is  below  55°F.  and  the  milk  is 
quickly  cooled  to  that  temperature  by  stirring,  it  will  do  very  .well, 
although  that  is  not  an  ideal  cooling.  If  ice  can  be  secured  it 
should  be  added  to  the  water  in  the  tank.  Aeration  in  pure  air 
over  a  cool  surface  is  beneficial  but  not  absolutely  necessary. 

TRANSPORTATION 

The  milk  should  be  put  into  bottles  closed  with  paraffined  paper 
caps.  This  is  the  only  practical  method  for  delivering  milk  in  the 
best  condition,  uncontaminated  by  the  dust  of  the  street.  In  any 
case,  in  order  to  protect  the  milk  from  the  heat  of  the  sun,  the  deliv- 
ery wagon  should  be  covered.  It  may  be  kept  cool  while  on  the 
route  by  cracked  ice  put  into  the  boxes  around  the  bottles.  When 
milk  is  dipped  from  open  cans  into  uncovered  vessels  more  or  less 
dirt  is  almost  sure  to  be  in  the  pitcher  or  pan  and  more  falls  in  from 
the  dusty  air. 

Milk  that  has  been  properly  cared  for  at  the  dairy  may  be  en- 
tirely ruined  by  warming  up  to  7O°F.  on  the  wagon.  Delivered  at 
such  temperature  it  cannot  be  expected  to  stay  in  even  fair  condition 
for  many  hours. 


/poT '.]          MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES.  63 

When  the  milk  is  hauled  by  the  dairyman  to  the  bottling  plant 
of  a  dealer,  or  to  the  train,  the  cans  should  be  covered  with  a  heavy 
canvas,  and  it  is  still  better  to  have  a  closely  covered  wagon. 

Milk  that  is  bottled  in  the  country  and  shipped  by  rail  is  gen- 
erally packed  in  iced  boxes,  and  reaches  the  city  in  excellent  con- 
dition. 

Milk  shipped  in  cans  on  the  ordinary  milk  train  is  not  kept  so 
cool  as  it  should  be  in  warm  weather.  This  Experiment  Station 
found  by  test  that  cans  of  milk  shipped  thus  40  miles  into  Chicago 
warmed  up  from  56°  at  the  farmer's  spring  house  to  64°  at  the 
train  platform  in  Chicago.  A  dozen  cans  varied  in  temperature 
from  62°  to  7O°F.  This  milk  warmed  up  several  degrees  more 
while  going  through  the  streets  of  Chicago  to  the  bottling  plant, 
which  is  a  severe  strain  on  the  keeping  quality  of  the  milk.  The 
railroad  should  provide  refrigerator  cars  for  summer  use.  The 
milk  reaching  New  York  City  from  a  distance  of  350  miles  is  often 
kept  in  better  condition  in  refrigerated  cars  than  milk  shipped  50 
miles  in  ordinary  cars. 

BOTTLING 

The  ideal  way  to  deliver  milk  is  in  bottles,  but  this  is  true  only 
when  the  bottles  have  been  properly  treated.  During  these  investi- 
gations the  writer  found  that  very  few  dealers,  especially  in  the 
smaller  cities,  sterilized  their  bottles  before  filling.  These  bottles 
when  filled  are  left  at  hundreds  of  houses,  and  in  some  cases  enter 
sick  rooms,  or  are  washed  in  the  same  pans  with  dishes  from  sick 
rooms;  they  are  frequently  used  by  the  servants  to  hold  all  kinds 
of  mixtures,  and  sometimes  are  carried  open  through  dusty  streets 
and  stored  in  dusty  rooms.  It  is  absolutely  wrong  to  fill  any  bottle 
with  milk  without  first  washing  it  thoroughly  and  then  subjecting 
it  to  live  steam  for  at  least  ten  minutes. 

DANGEROUS  BOTTLING 

In  one  Chicago  bottling  plant  owned  by  a  firm  that  operates  a 
number  of  wagons,  the  writer  found  a  large  truck  loaded  with  bot- 
tles ready  to  be  filled.  These  were  not  even  washed  clean.  The 
means  of  cleaning  were  an  almost  hairless  brush  on  a  small  turbine 
wheel.  The  bottles  were  placed  in  lukewarm  water,  given  a  whirl 
on  the  bald-headed  brush,  and  rinsed  in  an  adjoining  tank,  without 
ever  being  put  into  water  hot  enough  to  scald  the  hands  of  the  work- 
men. In  this  same  depot  a  shelf  over  the  back  part  of  the  tank  had 
become  so  well  covered  with  dirt  that  oats  spilled  there  had  taken 
root  and  were  growing  luxuriantly.  The  horse  stable  was  in  the 


64  BULLETIN  No.   126.  [November, 

same  building  with  the  bottling  room,  and  separated  from  it  by  a 
driveway  from  which  open  doors  communicated  with  both.  The 
pig-pens,  chicken  sheds,  and  horse  stables  of  the  farmer  are  "inno- 
cent bystanders"  as  compared  with  the  evil  possibilities  in  unster- 
ilized  milk  bottles,  such  as  were  found  in  this  place. 


THE  DUTY  OF  THE  CONSUMER 

Not  only  the  producer  and  dealer  but  the  consumer  has  some- 
thing to  do  in  securing  a  supply  of  clean,  sanitary  milk.  He  should 
appreciate  the  superiority  of  good  milk,  should  know  what  such 
milk  is  and  which  dealers  are  selling  it  in  his  city.  Every  dairyman 
who  tries  to  meet  the  modern  requirements  of  good  milk  should  be 
given  trade  in  preference  to  the  man  who  is  wedded  to  unsanitary 
customs.  Many  a  consumer  will  use  the  product  of  poor  cows 
handled  in  unsanitary  buildings,  rather  than  pay  a  cent  or  two 
more  per  quart  for  clean,  safe  milk.  This  is  a  direct  bid  for  poor 
milk. 

If  the  consumer  would  visit  the  dairies  of  his  city  and  find  out 
for  himself  how  the  milk  is  handled  it  would  result  in  good  to  all 
concerned.  A  number  of  milkmen  have  admitted  that  they  would  be 
ashamed  to  let  their  customers  see  how  the  milk  is  produced.  An 
intelligent  demand  for  clean  milk  would  go  far  to  improve  the  situ- 
ation. It  would  at  least  set  the  dairyman  to  thinking  if  a  few  ques- 
tions like  the  following  were  asked  him : 

"Are  all  your  cows  healthy  ?"  "Do  you  keep  them  clean  ?"  "Is 
your  barn  light  and  well  ventilated?"  "Are  your  bottles  sterilized 
each  time  before  filling  ?" 

If,  in  making  a  round  of  the  dairies,  the  consumer  should  find 
an  up-to-date,  sanitary  place  and  see  the  extra  care  taken  to  produce 
good  milk,  it  is  very  likely  he  would  be  willing  to  pay  a  little  more 
money  for  such  milk. 

The  consumer  is  often  to  be  blamed  for  the  milk  souring  quickly. 
First-class  milk  left  at  his  home  in  a  clean  bottle  and  at  a  low  tem- 
perature, may  be  sour  or  off  flavor  twelve  hours  later  because  it 
was  left  standing  in  a  warm  kitchen  for  a  few  minutes,  or  was 
poured  out  into  a  pan  that  had  been  washed  in  the  dish-pan  and 
wiped  on  a  towel  that  had  done  service  for  all  kinds  of  dishes  for 
several  days.  Milk  should  not  be  left  standing  in  the  sun  a  minute 
after  the  milkman  leaves  it.  The  consumer  should  have  a  place  for 
the  milk  inside  the  house  or  in  the  shade,  and  should  see  that  the 
deliveryman  puts  it  there.  It  should  be  taken  immediately  to  the 
coolest  place  in  the  house  and  left  in  the  bottle  without  removing 
the  cap  until  wanted  for  use,  or  he  cannot  blame  the  milkman  if  the 


/po/.]          MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES.  65 

milk  spoils.  The  consumer  does  not  deserve  good  milk  unless  he 
discriminates  in  favor  of  such  milk  and  takes  the  proper  care  to 
keep  it  good  after  it  reaches  him. 

At  present  prices  the  cost  of  milk  produced  in  Illinois  in  such  a 
manner  as  has  been  recommended  here,  should  not  much  exceed  8 
cents  a  quart  delivered,  and  at  this  price  it  is  cheaper  food  than 
meat.  It  cannot  be  produced  and  delivered  for  5  cents;  six  cents 
leaves  too  small  a  margin  of  profit  for  the  honest  dealer;  7  cents 
will  do  in  many  localities.  However,  these  prices  do  not  apply  to 
special  or  fancy  milk.  When  the  people  insist  on  having  good  milk 
and  are  willing  to  pay  a  fair  price  for  it,  the  milkmen  will  fall  into 
line  quickly  and  supply  the  demand. 

In  one  case  a  dairyman  advertised  the  exact  way  in  which  he 
produced  clean  milk,  and  offered  it  at  2  cents  per  quart  above  the 
regular  price.  Soon  he  found  more  customers  than  he  could  supply. 

THE  DUTY  OF  THE  CITY 

All  large  cities  have  found  themselves  compelled  to  regulate  and 
inspect  their  milk  supply.  No  officials  of  the  Federal  Government, 
or  even  of  the  State  Pure  Food  Commission,  can  visit  any  number 
of  towns  often  enough  to  be  depended  upon  for  regular  inspection 
of  the  milk  and  the  dairies.  This  must  be  taken  up  vigorously  by 
each  municipality  itself.  The  city  owes  to  its  citizens  such  super- 
vision as  shall  protect  the  lives  of  their  children  as  well  as  guaran- 
tee them  the  worth  of  their  money  spent  for  milk. 

Inspection  need  not  be  made  very  often.  In  a  city  of  from  10,- 
ooo  to  20,000  population,  one  inspector  can  gather  all  necessary 
samples  of  milk,  inspect  dairy  conditions,  meats,  fish,  and  water,  be- 
sides testing  the  milk.  Good  inspection  means  that  a  competent 
person  must  be  always  on  the  lookout  to  see  that  proper  regulations 
are  observed.  Samples  should  be  gathered  every  day  in  some  part 
of  a  large  town  (50,000  inhabitants)  or  once  a  week  in  all  parts  of 
a  small  town.  No  time  should  be  set  for  taking  samples;  the  in- 
spector should  be  irregular  in  his  visits.  The  dairyman  must  never 
know  when  the  inspector  is  coming,  but  should  understand  that  he 
may  come  at  any  time. 

The  apparatus  required  for  the  analysis  of  milk  is  not  expensive. 
The  butter  fat  and  total  solids  may  be  determined  by  the  use  of  the 
Babcock  test  and  the  lactometer.  These  will  eive  all  the  informa- 
tion necessary  regarding  the  composition  of  the  milk.  The  pres- 
ence of  preservatives  may  be  detected  by  simple  tests  that  anyone 
may  learn  within  a  few  hours.  Often  it  will  be  found  convenient 
for  a  town  to  employ  the  high  school  chemist  to  do  this  testing. 
The  cost  of  all  the  apparatus  needed  will  not  exceed  $25. 

The  city  does  not  need  to  go  into  court  to  get  rid  of  dishonest 
dealers.  All  that  is  necessary  is  to  publish  the  results  of  all  an- 


66  BULLETIN  No.  120.  [November, 

alyses  and  inspections,  as  soon  as  made,  in  the  daily  papers,  naming 
each  dairyman  or  dealer  in  connection  with  the  results  concerning 
his  milk.  The  honest  dealers  will  be  glad  to  have  the  public  know 
the  kind  of  milk  they  are  selling.  The  people  will  soon  stop  buying 
from  the  men  who  furnish  a  poor  grade  of  milk,  or  who  will  not 
clean  up  their  dairies  or  plants. 

City  officials  and  consumers  are  here  cautioned  against  accept- 
ing pasteurization  as  a  remedy  for  unsanitary  methods  of  produc- 
tion. Clean  milk  pasteurized  is  good,  but  impure  milk  cannot  be 
made  right  by  pasteurization.  Every  firm  that  advertises  pasteur- 
ized milk  should  have  its  source  of  supply  inspected  as  well  as  its 
methods  of  pasteurization. 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  city  to  make  sure  that  its  health  commis- 
sioner knows  something  about  milk  and  has  backbone  enough  to 
enforce  the  law.  One  commissioner  visited  said  that  he  did  not 
know  anything  about  the  milk  sold  in  his  town  and  did  not  want 
to  know.  He  said  that  he  had  enough  to  do  without  getting  into 
"that  muss."  Twenty-four  samples  collected  in  that  town  at  a  later 
date  showed  17  below  the  legal  standard  in  total  solids,  8  below  in 
butter  fat,  7  containing  formaldehyde,  and  all  containing  sediment. 
Evidently  it  was  a  "muss."  Another  health  commissioner  wrote 
the  Dairy  Department  asking  what  preservatives,  if  any,  could  be 
used  in  milk  without  being  harmful  and  without  violating  the  law. 
And  what  seems  stranger  still,  both  these  men  were  physicians.  A 
number  of  health  commissioners  absolutely  refused  to  move  in  the 
matter  of  milk  inspection  because  they  did  not  care  to  stir  up  the 
enmity  of  the  milk  dealers.  Such  men  should  be  sharply  rebuked 
and  be  made  to  give  way  to  men  who  have  some  conscience  and 
courage. 

DAIRY  SCORE  CARD 

Note — There  is  printed  herewith  a  score  card  for  dairies  pre- 
pared by  the  author  of  this  bulletin  and  also  for  creameries,  which 
is  a  modification  of  the  one  suggested  by  Professor  R.  A.  Pearson 
of  Cornell  University,  and  in  actual  use  in  the  City  of  Cleveland. 
Since  these  were  prepared  the  National  Dairy  Association  has  ap- 
pointed a  committee  of  which  Professors  Trueman  and  Pearson  are 
members,  to  consider  and  report  at  a  later  meeting  upon  the  most 
acceptable  form  of  score  cards.  When  the  report  will  be  made  and 
accepted  is  uncertain.  In  the  meantime  something  of  the  kind  is 
needed. 

Professor  Trueman  is  a  pioneer  in  the  idea  of  a  score  card  for 
dairies  and  creameries,  and  the  station  prints  the  following  as  rep- 
resenting the  best  available  information  up  to  the  time  of  the  prep- 
aration of  the  text  of  this  bulletin. 

E.  DAVENPORT,  Director. 


zpo/.]          MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES. 


07 


SCORE:  CARD  FOR  DAIRY  INSPECTION 
Owner  or  lessee  of  farm, , 


Town, State, 


Number  of  cows, Quarts  of  milk  produced  daily, 

Is  product  sold  at  wholesale  or  retail? 

If  shipped  to  dealer  give  name  and  address 

Permit  No Date  of  Inspection, 


.190. 


IV.      Milkers 
and 
milking-. 


V.    Handling 
the  milk. 


I.  Health     (No  score  will  be  given  until  all  sick  cows  Per- 
and  protec-     have  been  removed.     All  cows  coughing  feet 
tion  of  the     or  emaciated,  must  be  isolated  and  their  score 
herd.                 milk   must  not  be  used.) 

Cows  in  good  vigorous  condition,  not  too 

thin 2 

Ventilation  in  stable 6 

Ivight 4 

Pure  food  and  water 4 

Comfortable  barn, 4 

20 

II.  Cleanli-     Cows  all  clean 

ness  of  the  Stable  clean 6 

cows      and  Air  pure,  no  unsanitary  buildings,  or  man 

their      sur-  ure  pile  within  200  feet  of  stable 3 

roundings.  Stable  yard  clean  and  well  drained 3 

20 

III.  Uten-  Utensils  clean,  free  from  rust,  sterilized 
sils,      their  Pure  water  for  cleaning,  and  protection 

construe-  of   its   source   from  contamination 6 

tion,       and  Utensils   constructed   with   seams    filled 

cleaning.  with  solder,  so  as  to  be  easily  cleaned. ..  2 

Proper  place  for  cleaning  and  storing 
utensils,  including  steam  boiler  and  ster- 
ilizing oven 4 

20 


(All   attendants    must    be    healthy,    and 
must  not  live  in  a  house  where  any  com- 
municable disease  exists.) 
Milking  done  with  clean,  dry  hands,  and 
cows  udder  sponged  or  wiped  with  damp 

cloth  before  milking 

Special  suits  used  for  milking,  or  regular 

suits  well  brushed 

Use  of  small  top  milk  pail 


Prompt  cooling  to  below  S5°F.  and  hold- 
ing at  low  temperature 

Handling  milk  in  sanitary  room 

Protection  during  transportation 


Total  score. 


10 

5 
5 

20 


10 
5 
5 

20 


100 


Points 
allow- 
ed 


Re- 
marks 


TOTAL  SCORE 
96  or  above 

90  "  " 
80  "  " 
Below  80 


EACH  DIVISION 
18  or  above 
16  "      " 
12  "      " 
Any  division  below  12 


DAIRY 

Excellent 

Good 

Medium 

Poor 


68 


BULLETIN  No.  120. 
DIRECTIONS  FOR  SCORING 


[November, 


I.  Health  and 
protection  of 
the  herd. 


Condition  of  cows:     If  vigorous  and  in  fair  flesh,  2; 
if  very  thin,  1;  if  weak  and  thin,  0. 
Ventilation:     Good   system,  6;  poor   system,  3;  no 
system,  0. 

Light:     3  sq.  ft.  per  cow,  4;  2  sq.  ft.  per  cow,  3,  one 
sq.  ft.  per  cow,  2;  less  than  1  sq.  ft.  per  cow,  0. 
Food  and  water:      Pure,  with  source  of  water  pro- 
tected, 4;  fair,  2;  poor,  0. 
Barn:     Comfortable,  4;  fair,  2;  bad,  0. 


Perfect 
score. 


II.  Cleanliness 
of  the  cows 
and  their  sur- 
roundings. 


Cows  all  clean,  8;  fairly  clean,  4;  dirty,  0. 

Stable    clean,    manure    removed    twice    daily,    6; 

fair,  3;  dirty,  0. 

Stable  air:      Pure   and   free   from  dust,  3;  fair,  2; 

bad,  0. 

Stable  yard  clean  and  dry,  3;  fair,  2;  bad,  0. 


III.      Utensils. 


Utensils  free  from  dents,  and  rust,  and  sterilized,  8; 
in  fair  shape,  4;  bad  and  not  sterilized,  0. 
Pure  water,  6;  fair,  3;  bad,  0. 

Utensils  constructed  with  seams  filled  with  solder, 
2;  bad  construction,  0. 

Proper  arrangement  for  cleaning  and  sterilizing, 
including  washing  sink,  steam  boiler,  and  ster- 
ilizing oven. 


IV.     Milkers 
and  milking. 


Milking  done  with  clean,  dry  hands,  udder  spong- 
ed clean,  foremilk  rejected,  10;  udder  brushed  but 
not   sponged,    hands    clean,  foremilk  -rejected,  6; 
udder    fairly   clean,   other   items  all   right,    4;   all 
points  of  clean  milking,  disregarded,  0. 
Clean  suits  for  milking,  5;  fair,  3;  bad,  0. 
Use  of  small  top  pail,  6  in.,  with  hood,  5;  small  top 
6  in.,  no  hood,  3;  8  in.  top,  2;  large  topped  pail,  0. 


V.       Handling 
the  milk. 


Prompt    cooling    to   below   55°F.,   10;    cooling   not 
prompt  but  within  an  hour  or  two,  5;  neither,  0. 
Room  plean,  well  ventilated  for  handling  milk,  5; 
fair,  3;  bad,  0. 

Covered  wagon,  5;  milk  covered    with  heavy  can- 
vas, 3;  no  covering,  0. 


I90/.] 


MILK  SUPPLY  OF  CHICAGO  AND  TWENTY-SIX  OTHER  CITIES. 


69 


CITY  OF 

Public  Health  Department 

SANITARY  INSPECTION  OF  CITY  MILK  PLANTS 

Owner  or  manager, Trade  name, 

City, Street  and  No. , State, 

(  Milk, 

Number  of  wagons, Gallons  sold  daily:  j 

(  Cream, 

Permit  or  license  No., Date  of  inspection,, 190. 

Score 

Milk  Room  Per-      Al-     marks 

feet    lowed 

Location 10 

Construction,  ") 

Floor  (3)...... '  10 

Walls  and  ceiling  (3) I  ' ' 

Drainage  (4) J 

Cleanliness 

Light  and  ventilation 

Equipment: 

Arrangement  (3)., 

Construction 

Sanitary  (2) 5> 20 

Durability  (2) 

Condition  (3) 

Cleanliness  (10) 

Milk 

Handling  (12) )  20 

Storage  (8) j 

Sales  Room 

Location  (2) ") 

Construction  (2) !  10 

Equipment  (2) j 

Cleanliness  (4) J 

Wagons 

General  appearance  (2) ) 

Protection  of  product  (3) ]• 10 

Cleanliness  (5) 

Total 100 

Sanitary  conditions  are:     Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor. . 

Suggestions  by  inspector: 

(Signed) 

Inspector. 


70  BULLETIN  No.   120.  [November, 

DIRECTIONS  FOR  SCORING 
MILK  ROOM 

Location:     If  not  connected  by  door  with  any  other  building,  and  surroundings 

are  good,  10;    when  connected  with  other  rooms,  such  as  kitchen,  stables, 

etc.,  make  deductions  according  to  conditions. 
Construction :     If  good  cement  floor,  and  tight,  smooth  walls  and  ceiling,  and 

good  drainage,  allow  10;    deduct  for  cracked  or  decayed  floors,  imperfect 

wall,  ceiling,  etc. 

Cleanliness  •  If  perfectly  clean  throughout,  allow  15 ;  deduct  for  bad  odors, 
unclean  floor  and  walls,  cobwebs,  unnecessary  articles  stored  in  room,  etc. 

Light  and  Ventilation :  If  window  space  is  equivalent  to  15  percent  or  more 
of  the  floor  space,  allow  5 ;  deduct  I  point  for  every  3  percent  less  than 
the  above  amount. 

Equipment : 

Arrangement :  Allow  3  points  for  good  arrangement ;    if  some  of  the  equip- 
ment is  out  of  doors  or  so  placed  that  it  cannot  be  readily  cleaned,  make 
deductions  according  to  circumstances. 
Condition :   If  in  good  repair,  allow  4  points ;    make  deductions  for  rusty, 

worn-out,  or  damaged  apparatus. 
Construction : 

Sanitary — If   seams  are  smooth  and   all  parts   can  be   readily  cleaned, 

allow  2 ;    deduct  for  poor  construction  from  sanitary  standpoint. 
Durability — If  made  strong  and  of  good  material,  allow  2 ;    deduct  for 

light  construction  and  poor  material. 

Cleanliness  — If  perfectly    clean,  allow  8  points;    make    deductions  ac- 
cording to  amount  of  apparatus  improperly  cleaned. 

MILK 

Handling:  If  milk  is  promptly  cooled  to  5o°F.  or  lower,  allow  12  points;  or 
if  pasteurized  at  a  temperature  of  I49°F.  or  above  and  promptly  cooled 
to  50°  or  lower,  allow  12  points.  Deduct  I  point  for  every  2°  above  50". 
If  milk  is  pasteurized  imperfectly,  deduct  6  points.  If  milk  is  improp- 
erly bottled  or  otherwise  poorly  handled,  make  deductions  accordingly. 

Storage:  If  stored  at  a  temperature  of  45°F.  or  below,  allow,  8  points.  Deduct 
i  point  for  every  2°  above  45°. 

SALES  ROOM 

Location :    If  exterior  surroundings  are  good  and  building  is  not  connected  wit h 

any  other  undesirable  conditions,  allow  2 ;    for  fair  conditions  allow  I  ; 

poor  conditions,  o. 
Construction :     If  constructed  of  material  than  can  be  kept  clean  and  sanitary, 

allow  2 ;    for  fair  construction  allow  i ;    poor  construction,  o. 
Equipment:     If  well  equipped  with  everything  necessary  for  the  trade,  allow  2; 

fair  equipment,  I ;    poor  equipment,  o. 
Cleanliness :     If  perfectly  clean,  allow  4  points ;    if  conditions  are  good,  2 ;    fair, 

i ;    poor,  o. 

WAGONS 

General  Appearance:     If  painted  and  in  good  repair,  allow  2  points;    for  fair 

condition,  i ;   poor,  o. 
Protection  of  Product :     If  product  is  iced,  allow  3  points ;    well  protected  but 

not  iced,  i ;    no  protection,  o. 
Cleanliness:     If  perfectly  clean,  allow  5;   good,  3;    fair,  2;    poor,  o. 


r\(   r 

M    >^«J     1  ^7- 

WlfWt4^*tfBfr  u 

<J^^  V^)="     X    /AJT*  I   M?W— 


